Summary Report - ROUND 1

2018
ROUND
ONE
SUMMARY REPORT
L
LAND CLAIM /
TREATY PIKWAKANAGAN
NEGOTIATIONS
UPDATE
Page 1 of 92 Land Claim/Treaty Negotiations Update ROUND ONE : SUMMARY REPORT
SUMMARY CONTENTS
REPORT Introduction 4 -7
ROUND ONE Negotiations

Beneficiary Criteria
8 - 21
17 - 19
COMMENT AIP 20 - 21
Indian Act 22 - 23
CONCERN Self-Government 24 - 29
Communications 30 - 32
COMMITMENT Harvest 33
Other 34 - 35
Q QUESTION Comments, Concerns + Commitments 36 - 40
A
Survey Responses 41 - 49
ANSWER Appendices 50 - 90

ROUND ONE MEETINGS 2018
FEBRUARY
28 - Commanda, Whiteduck, Baptiste
MARCH
7 - Kohoko, Benoit, Jocko
8 - Kingston
21 - Bernard, Tennisco
28 - Toronto
29 - Commanda
APRIL
11 - Sarazin
12 - Ottawa
18 - Amikons, Aird, Lavalley, Meness
SUMMARY MEETINGS
July 19 - Pikwakanagan
August 7 - Ottawa
August 10 - Kingston

A NOTE FROM CHIEF Kirby Whiteduck
Kwey kwey,
We hope this report finds you and all your relations in good spirits.
We are excited to share this comprehensive report from our first
round of land claim/treaty negotiations update meetings and to
continue these discussions in future rounds of meetings.
We set out in this first round to address a number of subjects that

are critical to our treaty negotiations and the future of the
Algonquin Nation. These discussions and this report are part of an
enhanced strategy to communicate with AOPFN members and
ensure that the best possible decisions are made with all available
information and with the support of AOPFN members.
Round One of our meetings made every effort to create

opportunities for more dialogue and was designed with the
intention of accountability and transparency in our work towards a
Final Agreement/Treaty. We hope that this renewed effort will bring
us the best possible resolution and a joyful, prosperous future.
Miigwetch,
Kirby Whiteduck, Chief

Photo by PJ Leroux

STAFF
Executive Assistant
CHIEF + COUNCIL
Alanna Hein Chief
Clerk/Assistant Kirby Whiteduck
DElores Kohoko Councillors
Presentation coordinator Jim Meness
Sarah Yankoo Ron Bernard
AOO Administrative Assistant Steve Benoit
Sabrina Clark Wendy Jocko
Barbara Sarazin
LEGAL Dan Kohoko
Contact
Alan Pratt Law Firm
613 625 2800 x 228
Alan Pratt
chiefcouncil@pikwakanagan.ca

Sections of answers highlighted in blue indicate Questions marked with an asterisk (*) indicate that the
that the text was added after the meeting(s) to question was asked in multiple meetings. For example,
provide additional information or clarify the if the question has ****, it means that the question was
answers provided at the meeting(s). This is to asked four additional times for a total of five. In these
ensure transparency, while also providing the most cases, the answer will be combined from all responses.
correct and complete answers.
Questions marked with (◉) indicate that the question was included in the Round One Summary Presentation.
Questions marked with (♦) indicate that the question was asked at a Round One Summary meeting.
This report contains all questions and answers, comments, concerns and commitments that were raised during
Round One meetings as well as the Summary Meetings of Round One. The comments and concerns voiced by
members do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Council. We have done our best to reflect the content
accurately and completely. However, there are a few questions that were not included in this report as the answers
are confidential and may affect our success in the process of negotiations. These questions can be further explored
in future rounds of meetings and one-on-one sessions with Council. The appendix documents provide additional
information to enhance the answers and satisfy the commitments made by Chief and Council to provide

NEGOTIATIONS
Q Why are we accepting contact and colonial

standards for starting points in negotiation?
There are legal expectations when proving title that

Q Will our rights be extinguished with the Final
Agreement? ◉
None of the negotiating parties are seeking
A A
we have to adhere to. These are Canada’s
extinguishment of rights. Thirty years ago
expectations, not ours. It is a cruel irony that this oral
negotiations sought extinguishment. There are
tradition and proof of use and occupation of territory
must be measured by the same force that destroyed specific clauses that were contained in past
it. We do not accept Canada’s standards, but we have agreements that are designed to extinguish rights.
to be mindful of the reality of legal and political “The treaty is intended to clarify and constitutionally
limitations. We have lost a lot of our oral history and protect those rights not extinguish them.” - February
traditions through the efforts of the Canadian 22, 2017 letter to AOPFN members
Q
government. We are in negotiations because of a
series of broken promises and lack of honour of the
What is the latest federal update concerning the
Crown.
land claim budget?
Q
Does Pikwakanagan have a separate vote for
A
The Federal Government is talking about offering a
ratification of the final Treaty Agreement? What
better package in terms of both land and cash. The
happens if Pikwakanagan votes “no”?** ◉
budget announcement was that the loan money will
A
We have always understood that a Final now be a forgivable grant. We are making a
Agreement could not be reached without submission to have all past loans forgiven. At the very
Pikwakanagan. The parties will not commit to an least, there will be no more borrowing taking place
AOPFN veto in writing. to get to a final treaty.

Q
Has the cash settlement offer gone up with inflation,
cost of living, etc? ♦
NEGOTIATIONS
A Yes. The cash component is in 2011 dollars. By the time

it is received it will have increased substantially.
well as the purpose. We all have to consider the future
membership yet to come as beneficiaries as well.
Q Has any of the cash settlement already been

invested? ♦ Q What is our current AOO debt load? ♦
A
$25 million as of the end of March 2017. As stated
Yes. Some of the dollars have been invested in
earlier, we hope to have this forgiven in full.
A Wateridge Village (formerly known as CFB Rockcliffe)
Q
How will the negotiations include members who
and we expect to receive a good return on that
moved to a different reserve? ♦
investment
A
Will the money that will be invested bring back a They are still Algonquins and this is something we are
Q return? At what point does the money come back to currently discussing.
the membership and improve the First Nation How will the implementation of the United
economy? ♦
Q Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous
People (UNDRIP) affect the negotiations? ♦
A It is expected that there will be sound financial
A
management practices taken when investing any monies UNDRIP does not include any guidance for
from the financial component of a treaty. It is yet to be negotiating the land claim. It does say that we have a
determined how revenues could be utilized for the right to Self-Government.
beneficiaries. We are contemplating ideas and receiving
Q
Are there other Nations who have negotiated a
suggestions such as pensions for seniors, enhanced
similar Treaty? ♦
health and dental benefits, education for our youth, etc.
A
This has to be further explored. Membership should have Other examples of modern day treaties include James
input as to how we authorize the use of capital funds as Bay, Nunavut, many in BC, Nisg̱ a’a, others in Quebec.
These agreements have evolved and improved.

Q Will the treaty recognize our sovereignty? ◉
We will be able to assume ownership and control over a

NEGOTIATIONS
A number of areas on a nation-to-nation basis with
Q
Canada. It is not clear, since we have not entered into Will we have title to the land selects that are
negotiations for Self-Government, what areas of transferred to AOO/AOPFN?
jurisdiction will be under First Nation control. There
We are working to harmonize fee simple ownership
A
are also many different understandings of true
and Aboriginal Title. It will be more control and
sovereignty. The Supreme Court has said that treaties
jurisdiction than what is currently available through
reconcile pre-existing Aboriginal sovereignty with the
the Indian Act. As of now, Ontario won’t budge on
assumed sovereignty of the Crown. At its core,
fee simple land designated for development.
Q
sovereignty is about self-sufficiency and sustainability.
How is the AIP being used in current
We, as your leadership, are committed to those values.
negotiations?
How will the Final Agreement benefit children,
Q
There is nothing in the AIP that is legally binding. It
A
grandchildren and great-grandchildren of current
is a political agreement to reach a certain level of
AOPFN members? ◉
understanding and continue to negotiations based
The Treaty will greatly increase our land base, provide
A
on that understanding. We are not using the AIP in
capital, access to economic opportunities, resource current negotiations. We are using a work plan.
revenue sharing and far greater control over our lives.
Q
What land is referred to as “Specified Algonquin
Since we are past the stage of the Agreement-in-
Land” in Section 12 of the AIP ?
Principle (AIP) we can now see specifically how our
Governance and taxation have been part of the
current and future Algonquin citizens will benefit and
A
discussion in negotiations for many years. However,
be protected by this agreement. It will never be
this specific portion of the AIP has not been
enough, but we will continue to negotiate a settlement
revisited since 2012.
that will have benefit and security for the future of our
Nation.
Q
What are the improvements or enhancements being
discussed at the negotiation table?** ◉
NEGOTIATIONS
A
We are expecting a detailed announcement soon. Council has
shared letters with the membership that were received in
Q What are the plans to secure more land?*** ◉ ♦
There will never be enough land, but we expect that some

response to our requests and concerns following the AIP vote
(Appendix H). We know the Provincial team has gone back to
A more land will be on the table. We don’t want to push for
more in such a way that risks that we get less. We will
their Cabinet and secured an enhanced mandate. However,
negotiate to own and manage as much as we can. This will
the political climate in the province for further enhancements
include co-management of Algonquin Park and interest in
may no longer be in our favour after the election of the Ford
other areas of land. Future meetings will focus on the land
government. The Federal team is currently going to their
selects that Pikwakanagan holds either solely or jointly
Cabinet to enhance their mandate. Discussions will centre on
with other communities. We will be seeking feedback and
land, money, more flexible approaches to Self-Government,
direction from members regarding how much more land,
resource revenue sharing and beneficiary criteria.
which parcels and their potential uses. This will be a highly
Q Is it possible to get a better deal in this process? Is it the

only process for settling outstanding land claims? ◉
confidential discussion.
Q
What is the reputation of the AOO amongst First
A
Our AIP was negotiated with the Harper government. If we did Nation organizations?
A
not sign the AIP to continue to negotiate we would not have Some First Nations and organizations do question who are
had the opportunity to know what is possible with the Trudeau the Algonquins of Ontario (AOO) and believe you must
government. So far, negotiations have been positive and we be a status Indian to be party to negotiations and
are able to negotiate for what members felt was missing or consultations. The majority of the Algonquin Nation
alarming in the AIP. We are to keep pushing for a better deal Representatives (ANRs) (11 of 16) are in fact status Indians
and we will carefully examine the new federal initiatives. We and they represent both status and non-status Indians.
are hopeful that the new mandates of Ontario and Canada will Those concerned about the AOO do not understand that
lead to a much improved package. The alternative to non-status Indians can have the same Aboriginal rights as
negotiations for settling land claims is to go to court. status Indians under the Indian Act.

What is the difference between Algonquins of NEGOTIATIONS
Q Ontario (AOO) and the Algonquins of
Pikwakanagan First Nation (AOPFN)?** ♦
members of Pikwakanagan. All beneficiaries will have the
A
Under the Indian Act we are recognized as a band and
same treaty rights related to harvesting and such matters
the other AOO communities are not. The other AOO
after the Final Agreement is completed, but AOPFN will have
communities represent status and non-status persons
additional treaty rights related to Self-Government.
Q
who assert Aboriginal rights. After the Final
Agreement is signed, the other AOO communities Is Council paid by the AOO?
may be recognized under the constitution in some
A
Council is paid through the negotiation process at the AOO.
fashion, but will not be bands under the Indian Act. Kirby receives an additional honorarium from the First Nation
AOPFN would remain a distinct recognized First as Chief. We chose this to save our First Nation money.
Nation and if we negotiate a Self-Government
Q Can the AOO continue to negotiate without

agreement, we would continue as a distinct First
Pikwakanagan? ◉
Nation with constitutionally protected self-governing
A
powers and determine our own membership etc. The It is understood that the Negotiations cannot continue
other AOO communities would not have the same without Pikwakanagan as we are the ones who began the
status as AOPFN. AOPFN is part of the AOO. We are claim. Canada and Ontario are negotiating to achieve
one of ten communities negotiating a modern Treaty. certainty about Algonquin Aboriginal rights and title and
Q
this cannot be achieved without Pikwakanagan. On the other
Our rights are different from the non-status
hand, the three parties agree it is also necessary to have the
Algonquins at AOO. How do you rectify that?
participation of non-status Algonquin Aboriginal rights
A
Chief and Council represent Pikwakanagan members holders.
and we are mandated by the membership of
Pikwakanagan. There are AOO voters who are also

NEGOTIATIONS
Q
Is Self-Government included in the negotiations? Is
Pikwakanagan the only community negotiating self
government?
Q Will money ever be distributed to members individually
(per capita)? Who makes the decision? ** ♦
A
Yes, under its current mandate, the Federal government
A
is insisting that Self-Government be negotiated as a part It is Council's position that per capita payments are not in
of the Final Agreement. Pikwakanagan is the only First the best interest of future generations. The funds should be
Nation and as such is the only AOO community that will held in trust and part of an investment and business plan
be negotiating Self-Government, although a new federal that will include investment and creating and delivering
mandate may provide authority to negotiate some form programs for all members.
of governance for the other communities.
There are reports that the Williams Treaty settlement recently
Q How does Council get a mandate to negotiate

specific elements of the Final Agreement?
announced they will have a distribution. If we want per
capita payments; we should proceed on this as a major new
A
We will consult the membership and seek direction and item to be negotiated and not simply deducted from the
guidance on proposed elements. current offer of $300 million.
Q
How much more money could be offered? Is there a Examples of other settlements that included per capita
time frame for the transfer of funds? *♦ payments are provided in Appendix E.
A The amount in the AIP is 300 million, which would be

350 million indexed from 2011. We still have to Q What is the 5 year work plan? Does Pikwakanagan have
its own work plan or just AOO?** ◉
A
negotiate the forgiveness of the debt. We are pushing A summary of the 5 year work plan is available in Appendix
for more money and there are indications that there will F. Council has identified Pikwakanagan priorities within the
be more. At this point we do not know how much more. AOO work plan. Negotiations are only part of what Council
must plan for and our First Nation Administration has various
work plans that Council is attentive to or responsible for.

Q If we walk away from the Negotiations now, what
will happen to the $ already spent? ◉
NEGOTIATIONS
A
Negotiations are currently being funded by grants not
loans. There continues to be discussions about
forgiving past loans for our negotiations. It is our
Q How will we pay the taxes if we develop settlement
lands? How will we fund this development?
A
Different areas and parcels will have particular
objective to secure this for the Final Agreement. When arrangements for development and taxation. We still have
the AOO was established, we secured a forgiveness to negotiate these specifics.
Q
of past debt from AOPFN. If negotiations fail, How will member owned private lands be affected by
negotiation debt stays on AOO books and not the Negotiations?* ◉
AOPFN’s.
Q A
Private lands, whether member-owned or otherwise held,
Will the First Nation still receive $ from the
will not be included in the treaty land selects. There will be
government if the land claim is settled?
more discussion about how member-owned private lands
A This is yet to be negotiated. Details will be in the Self-

can be included or excluded in First Nation Jurisdiction(s)
Government negotiations and agreement(s). If we
(i.e. for taxation purposes) as we enter into negotiations for
don’t pursue Self-Government, the reserve will
Self-Government.
Q
continue as is. The AIP makes it clear that our
Will the reserve expand? Will it include Pakottina Trail
entitlement to programs and services will not be
or county forest(s)? * ♦
affected.
Q A
How will the negotiations address the resources, The reserve can expand and will be constitutionally
lumber and water rights? protected if we negotiate a Self-Government agreement.
We are seeking revenue sharing agreements in many Pikwakanagan can have a Self-Government land base over
A areas. Also stumpage fees and mining rights. This may the existing reserve and some additional land. Our position
be better suited to the Self-Government agreement to is that the Pakottina Trail can be whatever is negotiated and
add to our First Nation revenue. There can be resource can have no municipal involvement whatsoever if that is
revenue sharing in both the final agreement and Self- what the members decide. Only Pikwakanagan First Nation
Government. will have authority over that land base.

NEGOTIATIONS
Q What is “fee simple”? ** ◉ ♦
Fee Simple is the highest form of private land

Q Have any First Nations ever reopened a Treaty?
Modern treaties are amended regularly, but the main
A ownership in Canadian law. We are working to see if

we can negotiate a version of land ownership that A elements do not change. The Robinson Huron Treaty is
being revisited currently. The challenge is based on the
recognizes Aboriginal Title and Land Rights that are fact that treaty rights have not been fulfilled. This is
Q
secure and constitutionally protected. focused on the annuity in particular and the value of the
land that the payment is based on. If the challenge is
Will the settlement lands be “fee simple”? ◉
successful, the annuity will increase. Nunavut could also be
A Government’s position is that the lands will be fee an example of a “reopened” treaty.
Q
simple. We are looking to negotiate a form of
Is the First Nation liable if we do not fulfill our
Algonquin Title. promises?* ◉
Q A
Yes, we could be, just as we are today. We will seek to
Will we have title to settlement lands?
ensure that any liability is zero or limited as much as
We are trying to harmonize fee simple ownership
A
possible. We must be diligent. We will of course seek to
and Aboriginal Title. It will be more control and ensure Canada and Ontario keep and fulfill their promises.
Q
jurisdiction than what is currently available through
What if Government changes during the 5 year work
the Indian Act. As of now, Ontario won’t budge on
plan?
fee simple land designated for development.
A
This plan was developed while Kathleen Wynne was
Q What is the plans for park lands?

premier. Now it will be up to Doug Ford. This was a unique
opportunity with the Liberals power in Toronto and in
A We are negotiating for co-management of parks. Ottawa. We did succeed with getting Ontario to adopt a
new mandate.

What succession planning are you doing for NEGOTIATIONS
Q youth and younger children right now? Can
succession planning be funded by the
Q implementation of the treaty and/or Self-Government
implementation budget as part of the land claim What are our “inherent rights”?*
A
negotiation process?
We want to encourage youth to pursue careers that

A Read Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s speech in Parliament
on Inherent rights Policy and Comprehensive Policy a New
will lead to their own personal success and the Framework of Section 35 in Appendix G. A new federal
sustainability of the Nation. We will need all kinds of
skills and training in both the administration and Q framework should be announced early in 2019.
Is there a legal process or legal realities that we
A
the treaty. We need to review our succession
should be aware of when the treaty is ratified or if
planning, Human Resources and retention policies.
there is no agreement?*
This is something that will be part of the
Photo by PJ Leroux

NEGOTIATIONS
Q
Is the beneficiary criteria going to be tightened
or amended before the Final Agreement? * ◉ Beneficiary Criteria
Yes. There are ongoing discussions about how the of the particular Algonquin Collective to which he or she
A criteria should be changed. It is Pikwakanagan’s has a Cultural or Social Connection, as well as providing
position that the criteria must be tighter and some general information about the nature of that
beneficiaries have to be part of the original nation connection.
or collective to be enrolled.
“The objective of the negotiations is to protect

Aboriginal rights, and at a minimum, benefit
Q Would Pikwakanagan members meet the proposed
stricter criteria? ◉
Algonquin Aboriginal rights holders.” - Dec 5, It is understood that anyone who is a member of AOPFN
2017 Letter
A would be a beneficiary. (If the criteria was applied to
Pikwakanagan members, there are probably some who
Q
What is a “present day social/cultural would not be able to meet the other stricter criteria).
connection” as it is stated in the current
criteria? * ◉
Q Is there going to be a blood quantum requirement? ◉
A
This area of the criteria is too weak in our opinion.
We are pushing to amend and tighten up the
We are trying to be sure that we are strict enough without
A
criteria. There needs to be stronger and more
excluding people. The courts have not supported blood
continuous connection to a First Nation and/or
quantum and a blood quantum cut off was not supported
Aboriginal rights holding “collective” over time. In
the last time it was proposed for this claim. However, if
the application process for Voters in the
AOPFN members want a blood quantum cut off, we can
Ratification Vote, an applicant was asked to
explore that again, although this will be very contentious.
complete a declaration, including the identification

NEGOTIATIONS
Q Will Pikwakanagan have the final say as to who
is a legitimate Algonquin? **** ◉
A
AOPFN is a large and often defining voice on the
development of the criteria. We are not going to Q genetically Algonquin. There are also members who
are not genetically Algonquin but who are registered
through adoption.
ask people to vote themselves off the list. It must be
a democratic process where Algonquin people
decide who is a beneficiary. The likely format is a
A How do you verify people on the voters list/
beneficiary list are actually Algonquin?*
Ratification Committee that consists of three parties. Part of the current criteria is showing Algonquin
The appeal process and format must also be descent from a list of verified Algonquin ancestors. A
finalized. person must provide documentation ie. birth,
baptismal, marriage, death records etc that prove a line
Q
Other ANRs and their communities know that the
of descent to an Ancestor. How strong a line that needs
claim will not move forward without a criteria that
to be is yet to be determined.
satisfies AOPFN members and leadership. It is
Q A
AOPFN position that Algonquin Aboriginal rights
holders will be the ultimate beneficiaries of the How will the Ratification/Beneficiary committee be
claim. formed?
A
Can you have Aboriginal rights without having Right now there is an Algonquin Nation Representative
blood? ◉ (ANR) group that works through these committees. We

will ensure that the committee or any other body that is
There are non-Indian people who were married formed to work on beneficiary criteria are rights
before 1985 who have Indian status and bearing Algonquin people. Previous committees were
Pikwakanagan membership who may not be made up of CDN, ON, AOO. It is in AIP that it will be this
composition for a number of years, following that it will

NEGOTIATIONS
Q
How are non status children of Pikwakanagan
members going to satisfy the AOO enrolment
criteria?
A
They will go through the process of direct lineage. It
is the position of AOPFN that all Pikwakanagan First
Nation members (and their descendants) will be
eligible to be beneficiaries.
Q Does AOO give people Aboriginal rights?
A
AOO does not give anyone rights. Aboriginal rights
are determined in accordance with legal criteria as
set out by the courts or treaty rights defined by
agreement.
Q
Are AOPFN members automatically registered
with AOO?
A
The enrolment process for the Final Agreement has
not yet been determined. In the AIP vote, AOPFN
members had to register for that vote.
Q Are there non-status voters enrolled in AOO that

connect themselves to Pikwakanagan?
A Yes, for voting purposes on the AIP. This number will

grow as more AOPFN descendants lack status.
Photo by PJ Leroux

Q Why is there an AIP?
NEGOTIATIONS
Agreement in principle
A
The AIP is one of several steps in the negotiation
Q
process. If the parties have reached an Agreement-in- Why was the AIP signed when the majority of
Principle only it means that they have not yet finished Pikwakanagan voters voted “no”?**
A
agreeing, for instance: where the parties make their During the Harper government, it was decided that despite
agreement subject to details or subject to contract; or the flaws in the AIP we needed to continue to see if a new
where so many important matters are left uncertain government may offer a better package through
that their agreement is incomplete. It is merely an negotiations. We needed to put the AIP behind us to enter
expression of intent and has no legal significance into the next phases of negotiations. Council acknowledges
whatsoever. that the effort to communicate to members during this time
Q How did Council decide to sign the AIP? was not sufficient. Council tried to find resolution or
assurances regarding member concerns from Ontario &
A
The reason and process was outlined in a letter dated
Canada. It is unusual for an AIP to be put to a vote and it
July 18, 2016 and this is attached in Appendix H.
has only ever happened in one other situation. The reason
Q
If the AIP is non-binding, why did it need to be and process was outlined in a letter dated July 18, 2016
Q
signed? and this is attached in Appendix H.
A
It was a step in the negotiation process. The Will there be another vote on the AIP?
government of the day, the Harper government, was
pressuring the process. If we did not sign we would
not know what might be available in an improved
A There will not be another vote on the AIP. However, there
will be a vote on the Final Agreement.
p a c k a g e . Th e A I P w a s s i g n e d t o re a c h a n
understanding and political commitment from the
Q Are we limited to the 117,000 acres as it states in the
AIP?
A
An increase to the available land for selection is part of
parties to continue to negotiate. Nothing is fixed; we
what we have requested as an “improvement” following
are not stuck with the land quantum or Self-
members’ concerns.
Government, for example.
Q If the AIP becomes a treaty will our tax exempt status
be the same?**
NEGOTIATIONS
Agreement in principle
A The AIP will not become the Treaty. If land taxes for
Q
members are not a part of Self-Government regime, and What is Council’s opinion on Brian Crane’s letter
we say no, then no taxes. Tax exemption is not an response (Appendix H) to the concerns put forth
Aboriginal right, but a legislative right for status Indians following the “no” vote on the AIP?
A
under the Indian Act. Taxation continues to be part of the Ontario’s position is not Council’s position. Ontario’s
discussion in our negotiations. position was that it will no longer be a reserve and that it
Q What land is referred to as “Specified Algonquin

Land” in Section 12 of the AIP ?
will be fee simple land under a Self-Government
agreement. We do not have to accept Ontario’s
A
statement.
This provision was to guarantee that no property taxes
would be paid on the three largest land selections.
Governance and taxation have been part of the
discussion in negotiations for many years. However, this
specific portion of the AIP has not been specifically
revisited since 2012.
Q What does it mean when the AIP says our rights will
be “modified”?
A We are seeking recognition and protection of our rights

and title in the 21st century. The exercise of rights change
over time and we want to protect the changes of how we Photo by PJ Leroux
exercise our rights much like the Nisga’a did in their
modern day treaty.

INDIAN ACT
Q Will children and grandchildren of current First Nation
members be status Indians? ◉
Q
What will Descheneaux’s impact be on the First
A
Nation? ◉ Right now under the Indian Act there are children and
grandchildren who are not eligible to be status Indians
A Bill S—3 provides flexibility for the Indian Registrar to

consider various forms of evidence in determining
and are NOT members of Pikwakanagan. Under a treaty
and Self-Government agreement these children and
eligibility for registration in situations of an unstated or
future children can be members of AOPFN even though
unknown parent, grandparent or other ancestor. The Bill
they might not have Indian Status.
also includes provisions that will remove the 1951 cut-off
When the land claim is settled, will there still be 6.1
in respect of the cousins. This amendment will come into
force at a later date, once consultations with First Nations
Q and 6.2 Status Indians? ◉
are completed. A land claim settlement will not affect how the Indian
It means that there will be more persons eligible to be A Status provisions work. If you have Indian Status now you
will not lose it if there is a treaty. No additional status
members of our First Nation. This is in addition to those
eligible after the legislation responding to the McIvor Indians will be created through the land claim process.
decision (2011). This will put further strain on First Nation Will the non-Algonquin women who gained Indian
budgets such as Post Secondary education and Social
Services etc.
Q Status through marriage ever have their status taken
away? ♦
When a person is given status, it cannot be taken away.
A We could explore this topic more through Self-

Government.

INDIAN ACT
Q Is there any way to change the 6.1 or 6.2 designation?
Does the First Nation control this?♦ Other provinces require that the goods be delivered
to a reserve.
A The Indian Act is Federal legislation and we are not able to

change it. The First Nation does not have access to or
control of the registration of Indians under the Indian Act.
Section 87 of the Indian act says that the “personal
property of an Indian or a band situated on a reserve”
is tax exempt.
Q
Will the Indian Act system of classification (ie. 6.1 and
6.2) be a part of the treaty’s beneficiary criteria?♦
Can Status Indians from other communities transfer
A The beneficiary criteria will be developed by the

Algonquins, not the Canadian Federal Government. We
can develop a criteria that will provide for all our
Q their membership to AOPFN if they are married to
an AOPFN member? ♦
A
You can bring a partner to AOPFN as a resident but
descendants. The Indian Act does not recognize or provide
their registration as an Indian cannot be transferred to
for all our descendants.
AOPFN without a resolution from their own reserve.
There must be a resolution supporting any transfer
Q
Is our point of sale tax exemption valid in other
from AOPFN and the individual’s own First Nation.
provinces? ♦
A
Ontario is the only province that honours tax exemption at
point of sale. This was accomplished through the Chiefs of
Ontario (COO), that includes AOPFN, which fought for
point of sale tax exemption to be part of provincial policy.

SELF-GOVERNMENT
Q Q
Will Pikwakanagan become a municipality under How will Self Government be economically
Self-Government? ◉ sustainable for Pikwakanagan?*** ◉
A A
No. Self-government lands will be under First Nation We do not have to assume control or fiduciary
jurisdiction. Outside of Self-Government lands, there responsibility for everything. Self-Government could
will have to be compromise with the surrounding be sectoral. For example, we can negotiate certain
municipalities for zoning, by laws, etc. Ultimately, it is controls within health, education, economic
up to the membership to decide what kind of development. We are also discussing opportunities for
ownership or regulations for Self-Government lands our share of alcohol, cigarettes and gaming taxes that
will be negotiated. Under the Indian Act, the Crown could help enhance the revenue for the First Nation’s
owns the land in trust for the band. Under Self- economic independence.
Q
Government, the First Nation could own the reserve How will AOPFN’s plans for Self-Government differ
and have more complete jurisdiction. It is possible to from current Indian Act leadership/government?
negotiate a version of title to the land rather than fee
A
We know that Indian Act governance will eventually
simple as CDN and ON governments have
result in our extinction. We also recognize that the
proposed; this form of ownership is beyond what is
Indian Act does not allow us to have the jurisdiction
available to any municipality.
and control that we should have. We will focus our
Currently the federal negotiator is seeking an chosen style of governance on those who have
enhanced mandate to be able to negotiate in a Aboriginal rights whether we choose to pursue Self-
more flexible way. Government, land claim settlement or the Indian Act.

SELF-GOVERNMENT
Q Will First Nation members on reserve be taxed?*** ◉ pushed for Self-Government agreements. Ontario is
A
currently seeking a mandate. We do not yet know
Under Self-Government we could negotiate long-term
whether the limits of both Canada and Ontario’s
fiscal arrangements to ensure we could have adequate
mandates will be acceptable to Pikwakanagan.
funds for providing services. Changes to taxation are yet
However, we hope the mandates of both Ontario and
to be discussed and are still in exploratory stages. There
Canada may be changing to permit more flexibility. It
are several options to discuss for taxation. There are 26
was a previous position of government but may not
Self-Government agreements in Canada now. We are
be the case with the new government mandate.
learning about these existing agreements and trying to
educate membership about the outcomes for those other
First Nations and how that may translate to AOPFN. We Q What areas of jurisdiction is the First Nation
planning to negotiate? ◉
A
have not begun to negotiate Self-Government. To do so,
We surveyed the membership in 2016 asking what
we will need a mandate and dialogue with membership.
areas we should pursue. We will be renewing this
Ultimately, if AOPFN does not want taxation, then there
discussion and seeking direction in 2019. Some
will be no taxation of members on reserve. If your Council
potential areas of jurisdiction were listed in Part Two
does tax you, you can protest and vote/toss them out in
of Round One (Appendix C)
the next election.
Q Can we negotiate Self-Government without the land

claim? ◉
Q W i l l t h e re b e a s e p a rat e v o t e f o r S e l f -
Government? ◉
A
Under the existing government mandates, we can’t have
Self-Government without a treaty and there will be no
A Yes, there will be a Pikwakanagan members only vote
on Self-Government. This was an issue around the
AIP vote and we got this clarification and
treaty without Self-Government. Canada has historically
commitment.

SELF-GOVERNMENT
Q Does Council promote Self-Government? ◉
Council views a good agreement on Self-Government as
A the most viable and likely alternative to the Indian Act

besides the treaty negotiations. In light of Prime Minister Q Is the First Nation going to tax off-reserve
members?
A
Trudeau’s recent announcement of a New Framework for No. However, we may be able to negotiate for a
Indigenous Rights and Reconciliation Legislation, portion of off reserve members’ taxes to be directed
Council is hopeful that we will have better tools and a to the First Nation for services, programs or benefits
b e tt e r p o l i t i c a l s u p p o rt f o r S e l f - G o v e r n m e n t that are rendered for off reserve members by
negotiations. Council hopes to secure a mandate from AOPFN. No proposed taxation plans have been
membership to enter in to preliminary negotiations so developed.
that we can all understand what a Self-Government
Q
Can the First Nation enter in to agreements with
agreement will contain and thoroughly analyze whether
Municipality, Province or Federal Governments
this is the best future for the community. We are also
for a share of taxes?
A
securing funding to explore and gather information for
This is something that we have considered and
the membership to be able to make the informed
begun to explore. It is difficult to achieve politically
decision can be made on a Self-Government mandate.
since there is unlikely to be support for a share of
Q
Will Algonquin Law(s) be recognized through Self- their taxes or an increase in taxes to private property.
Government? Will our laws be subservient to It is possible that we can negotiate resource revenue
Canada/Ontario? sharing within traditional territory.
A The Federal and Provincial law may overlap, but

Algonquin laws will prevail and we are not under federal
authority.

Q Where will members be able to read the proposed
taxation plans?
SELF-GOVERNMENT
If we are given a mandate to negotiate Self-Government If we own land in Algonquin Territory (Pembroke, for
A that may include taxation we will draft clauses and plans

in consultation with the members. Q example) for economic development purposes and
we are self governing, would that be self
government land or fee simple land to
Q
What would happen if off reserve members stopped
Pikwakanagan?
paying taxes?
A
Canada and Ontario would want it to be fee simple but
Under the current system this would be up to the
A
we would try to negotiate it to be Pikwakanagan Self-
federal or provincial government to enforce penalties.
Government lands for economic development
Currently, if you refuse to pay your taxes to the
purposes if that’s what the members want. We will
governments and don’t take steps to resolve your
always try to negotiate a tax exemption.
unpaid taxes, the CRA, the province or the municipality
can take legal action against you. It can:
Q
If I currently have a CP on my land, will that land be
1. “Garnishee” your income or bank account, which
fee simple under Self-Government?
means that some or all of your pay cheque could go
A
straight to the taxing authority, or If this is what is negotiated for Pikwakanagan’s Self-
Government agreement, then land will be converted to
2. Seize and sell your assets to settle your tax bill.
fee simple under AOPFN authority. If land is fee simple
Q When will you be asking membership for a mandate

to begin Self-Government negotiations?
under AOPFN authority then we would own it together.
Municipalities would not own it or have any control or
A We expect to begin discussions in the next round of authority of our Pikwakanagan Self-Government lands.
meetings and seek a mandate in 2019.

SELF-GOVERNMENT
Q Who provides the mandate for AOPFN to negotiate

Self-Government? Q Is there a possibility that we will finance our own
education?
A Only AOPFN membership can provide Council with the

mandate to negotiate Self-Government. A It is possible that we can enhance our funds for
education through self government negotiations.
Q Does Self-Government only apply to the reserve?

Self-Government could also apply to our settlement
Q
When the Self-Government agreement is signed,
do we become self-governing on that day or is
A
lands secured through land claim negotiations. We there a plan up to 15 years to become self-
could also pursue a mandate to seek certain governing?
jurisdiction within Algonquin territory.
A It will depend on what the people want and what can
Q
Any thought on a proposed consensus of an be negotiated.
arbitrator?
Q W i l l t h e re b e a s e p a ra t e v o t e f o r S e l f -
A
We still have to have a lot of discussion on this. Government?
Arbitration can be built in to the process(es). However,
adjudicators decisions are final and may have legally A Yes, there will be a Pikwakanagan members only vote
on Self-Government.
Q
binding implications for the parties. There are also Will there be a policy for land management,
limited rights of review and appeal. education, health, resources: lumber and water
Q Will the government still have a fiduciary rights, etc?
A
responsibility if we accept Self-Government? We have to begin to negotiate which powers we want
A
It is yet to be determined through negotiations. For and policies will be developed once negotiations are
example, health would still have OHIP. We may be able near an agreement.
to negotiate more funding support for education.

SELF-GOVERNMENT
Q Could AOPFN have its own police force if we
choose Self-Government? ♦
A
Other Ontario First Nations have a tripartite agreement Q Under self government would my grandchildren be
members of Pikwakanagan?
A
with COO, Federal and Provincial governments to
Inequities related to registration and membership under
provide funding. In our case, they said there was no
the Indian Act and the impacts on the community will be
more funding available at this time. However, this can
the focus of future discussions. Members will be consulted
be a topic for negotiations.
Q
on how best to ensure unintended consequences are
Will we still have a Chief and Council if we pursue mitigated with the implementation of any legislative
Self-Government? ♦ changes.
A
This is up to the members to decide. All other First
Nations with Self-Government agreements have chosen Whatever criteria we create for membership must allow
to continue with Chiefs and Councils. for descendants of current Pikwakanagan members to
continue membership in to the future. We want to
Q
Is there a system for AOPFN to be involved in
negotiate our own membership rules in a Self-
development projects in the settlement area? Can
Government agreement. This means we would not have to
members be notified of possible projects in there
adhere to the requirements for Indian Status.
area? ♦
A
Currently, Pikwakanagan’s Economic Development
department, along with Council are working on
developing partnerships with businesses and
proponents. Members can be notified by our weekly
newsletter, website and meetings. We may decide to
directly inform members who live close to particular
developments if we have their addresses. Photo by PJ Leroux

COMMUNICATIONS
Q Will there be community meetings?* ◉
Yes. There was a summary of Round One that was a

members only section of the website will be available
soon. Every member will need their own personal
A
email address.
membership/community meeting. We are exploring
a variety of ways to dialogue with membership so
that all styles of learning and communication can be
Q Are Non-Status people allowed to attend these
meetings?
A
accommodated. Non-status people are not allowed to attend these
Q
meetings. Residency does not equal membership.
Is the presentation to off-reserve members
There is confidential information relayed that is for
different? ◉
A The presentation is the same on and off reserve.

members only. If they are a spouse of a member or
that member needs assistance during the meeting, we
Q What is happening with the communications will asses this on a case by case basis.
Q
officer? Why is there no slide in the printed presentation on
A This position is currently under review. the legal opinion?
Q A
Whose job is it to relay the correct information to This section contains confidential information, a legal
membership?* opinion, and we do not want to have this information
circulated. This information is just for members and we
A
It is a shared responsibility amongst Council, staff
do not want government to have access. Since we are
and members to share the correct information. The
in negotiations, not in court, we have to be careful
position of Communications Officer will soon be
about what information is circulated.
posted and the website is now being redesigned. A

Q What if you do not want your name on the survey?
The responses to the survey will not be made public.

COMMUNICATIONS
A We are exploring options for allowing anonymous

responses. However, these options are usually
Q
Can members attend meetings in either the cities or
on the reserve? How do members ensure they are
expensive and require us to provide this information notified of their family meeting on reserve if they
to a third party and this is not a reasonable option are living off-reserve? ♦
either. If we allowed anonymity with the current
A
Yes, members can attend any meeting on or off-
survey tool, it would be impossible to verify the
reserve. Members can request that their name be
responses and ensure that duplicate or deliberately
included on the list for their family on reserve by
disruptive responses have not been submitted to
calling or emailing their request.
influence the results in any particular way.
Q
How can members share information amongst
Q Will members see the five year work plan?* ♦
A
each other? Can members be provided mailing
Yes.
addresses or contact info for other members?
A Due to confidentiality issues we are unable to provide

What is Council’s plan to heal the divide(s) in the
Q
personal and private information to others. Members
community and encourage members to attend
can use social media, attend events or seek
these meetings?
A
connections through family and friends. There are
Ultimately it is up to the individual to decide whether
several examples of member-organized information
to attend or not. We have offered incentives or gifts in
sharing on social media.
the past and we now offer snacks or a meal. We are
Q
Can AOPFN develop an email listserve to reach trying several different approaches, times and
members who may prefer digital communication locations to accommodate the needs of different
A
or do not have a permanent mailing address? members. We did expect more members to attend
Absolutely. these sessions.

COMMUNICATIONS
Q Will meeting materials be made available to members

who were not able to attend these meetings?
Q Can the survey accept responses from mobile
devices? ♦
A Yes.
A Yes.
Q Can members attend any meeting, on or off reserve?

♦ Q What will the topic be for the second round of
A
meetings?
A
Yes. Beneficiary Criteria.
Photo by PJ Leroux

HARVEST
Q What is happening with the Metis issue? ◉ situation. This 1996 case could have wiped out most of
Algonquin Aboriginal rights and title if it had gone against
The Metis issue is an important one that we are going to
A
us. We intervened and helped avoid this result.
go to court to defend. Ontario has recognized a
Q
Why are we not taking allocations of deer and elk
“historic” Metis community in Mattawa which is in
before the provincial hunt?
Algonquin territory. We have expressed to Ontario that
we oppose this recognition and we have facts and There has been a process to determine the Algonquin
research to support our opposition. We have filed a
Statement of Claim in Court to challenge Ontario’s
A allocation for sustainable harvest. This has been in place
since 1995 and is a joint harvesting plan with MNR.
recognition of Metis harvesting. Algonquins have only been harvesting approximately 40%
of the sustainable limit; either people are not harvesting
Q
Are flyovers done in territory to determine and
Q
as much or they are not reporting. The sport hunt only
manage the moose population? ◉
goes for 10 days. The current allocation system and
A
Moose Aerial Inventories (MAI) happen every so many sustainable limits are currently being reviewed.
years for each Wildlife Management Unit (WMU)
including Algonquin Park to determine moose A What was the impact of the 1930 transfer agreement
in the prairies?
populations and harvestable numbers of moose per
WMU. We believe that more of these are required to It modified treaty hunting rights by taking away
provide better data for sustainability for future commercial rights but expanded where treaty
generations. beneficiaries can harvest. It has no application in Ontario.
Q What was the impact of the Cote case on our Q Has there been clear-cutting in the park by Achray?
harvesting? ◉
A No.
A The Cote Case was a very important and serious

OTHER
How many consultations have been done between Further details about specific consultations and process on
Q government(s) and ourselves in the last year? Who is

the point person on the First Nation? Does AOO act
the Tanakiwin Website.
There was a constitution drafted for the First Nation in
as the primary filter or does it go to Chief and
Council? ◉
Q 2009. Has it been reviewed, used or amended by
membership? ◉
A
There are dozens of consultations through the office in
A
This initiative did not move beyond a draft. We did get a lot
Pembroke on land dispositions with both the Federal
of feedback. We will have a partial, interim constitution that
and Provincial Governments. It all gets referred to the
everyone will vote on before the final agreement.
Pembroke consultation office. A select few consultations
Q
are directed to AOPFN; gravel pit assessments, roads, What is Pikwakanagan’s relationship with Quebec First
etc. Most of the consultations have to do with public Nations?* ◉
safety. We receive all the studies and documentation
A
Quebec First Nations do not respect or acknowledge the
that is presented to AOO.
AOO. This does create a division and a challenge in our
There is no Aboriginal veto in the process of relationship with Quebec First Nations. However, we have
consultation and there are not many cases that been meeting with the Chiefs of the Quebec Algonquin
consultation results in the outcome sought by the First First Nations on a number of initiatives and projects in the
Nation. The Energy East pipeline is a recent example of Ottawa area over the last 2-3 years. In spite of some of our
consultation where the First Nation spent a lot of time differences we get along and respect each other. We will
gearing up for consultation and seeking continue to meet.
accommodation and the project ended up being
dropped.

OTHER
Q
How big was Algonquin Traditional Territory at time of
Royal Proclamation?
A
There are a number of descriptions of Algonquin
Traditional Territory available to us and they have all formed
our current definition and boundaries for negotiations.
Q
What is it that makes us Algonquin and
Q Who is our Grand Chief?
AOPFN does not have a Grand Chief in terms of the

distinguishes us from mainstream Canadian
culture/society? ♦
A Algonquin people or an Algonquin Tribal Council. In

Ontario, we are a part of the Chiefs of Ontario, which
includes the Anishinabek/ Union of Ontario Indians. Glen
A
Our ancestors were here first and we continue to
have pre-existing Aboriginal Rights. We have
distinct culture, language, laws, etc.
Hare is the Grand Chief of the Anishinabek.
Q Q
Aboriginal rights are not individual but are collective. If we were to build a school on the reserve
Do non-native people have individual rights or would the operation be funded? ♦
collective rights?
A
We do have land set aside for a school on-reserve.
A
Rights against power, Aboriginal rights and treaty rights
However, the Federal Government will not build or
belong to individuals, who belong to something bigger.
operate it because we do not have enough students
Part of the criteria for having Aboriginal rights is that you
must belong to a First Nation or “collective” that is/was part to justify the cost. If we did, there would be funds
of the original Nation to the present day. If you do not for its operation.
belong to such a First Nation or “collective” then you most

likely do not have Aboriginal rights. There are other
collective rights in the Constitution related to official
languages.

COMMENTS
OTHER COMMUNICATIONS
‣ Many people, both Indigenous and non-Indigenous, do ‣ There are Metis groups in the Ottawa Valley. Often they
not have a thorough understanding of the history and are Algonquin people who do not fit in anywhere. ♦
significance of Wampum belts. ♦
‣ AOPFN should have a radio station. ♦
‣ Algonquin language resources are difficult to use
‣ Meetings are better when there is dialogue amongst
because dialects are different. ♦
members and leadership.
‣ There are a lot of consultation requests for Council to ‣
‣ Members do not need to hear as much history, would

handle.
prefer to focus on current issues.
‣ The Zibi project did not employ as many members as ‣
promised. ‣ For future meetings, focus on one topic. ◉ ♦

HARVEST ‣
‣ Smaller meetings are better for discussion.

‣ Practices should be sustainable for future generations. ‣
‣ We are not pushing our rights and responsibilities to ‣ It is good to see all of Council out at these meetings.
harvest and manage populations. ‣ Did not receive invitation to meeting. ◉
**REMINDER: Comments and concerns are written as

expressed by membership and do not necessarily
represent the opinion or position of Chief and Council.

COMMENTS
SELF-GOVERNMENT NEGOTIATIONS (AGREEMENT-IN-PRINCIPLE)
‣ AOPFN is not like any municipality. ‣ Membership voted “no” on the AIP. Continuing to
negotiate after membership said “no” does not
‣ Aboriginal title is better than fee simple.
inspire confidence in leadership. Negotiations should
‣ Succession planning needs to happen immediately
not have continued until issues were resolved to the
as we are missing opportunities with students
satisfaction of membership.
graduating and soon to graduate high school.
‣ The “no” vote did not necessarily mean that
‣ We need a better retention process so that skilled
membership wanted Council to stop negotiating, but
workers do not leave the First Nation to seek
that there should be more open discussion with
opportunities elsewhere.
membership about their concerns.
INDIAN ACT
‣ The government does not usually sign something
‣ We are breeding ourselves out of existence having that is non-binding.
children with non-native people through the
provisions in the Indian Act.
‣ Our Election Code was an example of working

outside the Indian Act.


COMMENTS
NEGOTIATIONS (BENEFICIARY CRITERIA) NEGOTIATIONS
‣ There are people on the band list who have no ‣ We were here before contact. That should not be the
Algonquin descent (i.e. Marriage pre 1985, measure of our presence/occupation of our territory.
adoption).
‣ The Canadian government will look out for their
‣ The AOO is recognizing people that are not rights only. They will not negotiate in fairness.
Algonquin.
‣ The Five Year Work Plan can be disrupted by a
‣ AOO members are not Pikwakanagan members and change in Provincial or Federal governments. ♦
their concerns are not ours.
‣ There could be a trust fund to help members return
‣ There will be more appeals of people on the AOO home. ♦
voters list.
‣ Set the beneficiary criteria up that protects the family

lines who can prove to be Algonquins.
‣ Pikwakanagan members may not meet the new

proposed criteria.
‣ People from the other AOO communities who may

not meet the stricter criteria should not be involved
in creating or approving the new criteria or the **REMINDER: Comments and concerns are written as
appeals process. expressed by membership and do not necessarily

CONCERNS
COMMUNICATIONS NEGOTIATIONS (BENEFICIARY CRITERIA)
‣ Not live streaming or providing digital access to

‣ If Section 87 is removed, there will be property tax on
information/meetings is a weakness in negotiations. ◉
reserve.
INDIAN ACT
‣ Beneficiary Criteria will tie up negotiations for another
‣ Those who lost status before 1985 and regained status
20 years.
through C31, C-3 (McIvor) and S-3 (Descheneaux), extends
to three generations or more. Those who never lost status or
have two status parents only extends to two generations.
This is still inequality.
‣ Living members are currently the end of the line as per

Indian Status provisions.
‣ Our goal should be to get out from under the Indian Act.* ♦


COMMITMENTS
‣ Changes to the management plan re: sports ‣ Review Election Code to allow off-reserve
hunt members to be elected as Chief and/or Council*
♦
‣ Have a Community Meeting*
‣ Provide copy of Justin Trudeau’s speech in

‣ Record and have meeting videos set up at the
Pa r l i a m e n t re : I n h e re n t R i g h t s a n d
office for members to come in and view
Comprehensive Policy, New Framework of
Section 35 Rights
‣ Provide members opportunity to review Alan
Pratt opinion re: title
‣ Outline all municipal plans that are
accommodating AIP, Jurisdiction re: taxation
‣ Ask people about “bottom line” re: land in
future meetings
‣ Provide specifics on improvements since AIP
‣ Provide copy of Indian Act and relevant sections

‣ I n c l u d e Wa m p u m h i s t o r y / t e a c h i n g s i n
of constitution
negotiations
‣ School on the First Nation, Teach Algonquin

‣Host a mandatory AOPFN staff information
Language
session ♦

SURVEY RESPONSES
52 15
CLICKS RESPONSES
Facebook
1
Direct
Other
1 1 3 Kingston
Pikwakanagan
Ottawa
24 27 Toronto
10
SURVEY RESPONSES
HOW SATISFIED ARE YOU WITH THE MEETING OVERALL?
2 1
5
7

SURVEY RESPONSES
HOW SATISFIED ARE YOU HOW SATISFIED ARE YOU

WITH THE HOSPITALITY? WITH THE VENUE?
1 11
4
7 4
3 9

SURVEY RESPONSES
HOW SATISFIED ARE YOU WITH THE
INFORMATION PRESENTED ON
ALGONQUIN HISTORY? DO YOU FEEL THAT YOU ARE BETTER
INFORMED ON ALGONQUIN HISTORY AFTER
THIS PRESENTATION?
1
4 2 11
6 11
7
2 2
0
YES NO PREFER NOT TO ANSWER

SURVEY RESPONSES
INFORMATION PRESENTED ON THE
INDIAN ACT STATUS PROVISIONS AND DO YOU FEEL THAT YOU ARE BETTER
ITS IMPACT ON OUR COMMUNITY? INFORMED ON INDIAN ACT STATUS
PROVISIONS AND ITS IMPACT ON OUR
COMMUNITY AFTER THIS PRESENTATION?
2 2
9
4
5
7
9 2 1 2
0
YES NO PREFER NOT TO ANSWER UNSURE

SURVEY RESPONSES
INFORMATION PRESENTED ON SELF
GOVERNMENT? DO YOU FEEL THAT YOU ARE BETTER
INFORMED ON SELF GOVERNMENT AFTER
THIS PRESENTATION?
2 1
3
4 6
3 3
6 4 1 4
0

SURVEY RESPONSES
INFORMATION PRESENTED ON DO YOU FEEL THAT YOU ARE BETTER
BENEFICIARY CRITERIA? INFORMED ON BENEFICIARY CRITERIA
AFTER THIS PRESENTATION?
2 2
7
2
4
4
3
7 4 1 2
0

SURVEY RESPONSES
INFORMATION PRESENTED ON THE DO YOU FEEL THAT YOU ARE BETTER
NEGOTIATIONS WORK PLAN? INFORMED ON THE NEGOTIATIONS
WORK PLAN AFTER THIS
PRESENTATION?
2 1
5
3
8 3
5 2 2 5
0

SURVEY RESPONSES
HOW SATISFIED ARE YOU WITH THE DO YOU FEEL THAT FAMILY
FORMAT OF THE FAMILY MEETING? MEETINGS ARE THE BEST
FORMAT FOR CHIEF AND
COUNCIL TO PRESENT
INFORMATION AND UPDATES TO
2 1 THE COMMUNITY?
3 12
6 6
11 1 0 3
0

APPENDIX
CONTENTS
(A) Table: Summary of Meeting Statistics
(B) Round One Part One
(C) Round One Part Two
(D) Summary Presentation
(E) Examples of Agreements which included per capita payments
(F) 5 Year Work Plan Summary
(G) Justin Trudeau’s speech in Parliament on Inherent rights Policy and
Comprehensive Policy a New Framework of Section 35
(H) Letters to Membership
(I) Advertisements/Notices

APPENDIX A
SUMMARY OF MEETING STATISTICS
Amikons,
Commanda, Kohoko,
Bernard, Aird, Summary: Summary: Summary: Summary:
Whiteduck, Benoit, Commanda Sarazin Kingston Toronto Ottawa TOTAL
Tennisco Lavalley, Pikwakanagan Kingston Toronto Ottawa
Baptiste Jocko
Meness
Invited 73 82 60 53 57 158 118 194 177 483 118 194 177 972
Attendance 17 9 3 9 9 13 10 12 7 40 12 10 10 161
Survey
1 3 1 0 0 4 3 1 1 N/A N/A N/A N/A 15
Responses
Comments 8 16 15 32 25 4 2 9 3 10 6 21 4 155
Questions 9 27 16 18 43 20 6 28 6 18 6 31 12 222
Concerns 3 0 3 2 13 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 0 25
Commitments 1 3 1 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 6 0 16
AGE RANGE 0-18 19-30 31-50 50+
Round One 0 0 7 20
Summary 5 6 23 77

ROUND ONE: PART ONE APPENDIX B





ROUND ONE: PART TWO APPENDIX C





ROUND ONE: SUMMARY APPENDIX D







EXAMPLES OF AGREEMENTS WITH APPENDIX E
PER CAPITA PAYMENTS
Tsuu T'ina Nation 145 is an Indian reserve in southern Alberta, Canada, created by Treaty 7. It is home to the Tsuu T'ina Nation.
The Tsuu T'ina nation and the federal government settled on inadequate compensation for the devastation caused by the
flooding caused by the Glenmore Reservoir in 1930. The federal government compensated the nation with $20M in 2013. The
compensation was divided by half for the greater community and $5,500 for each member of the tribe.
Wabigoon Lake Ojibway Nation - Wabigoon Lake Ojibway Nation is a First Nation community located in the heart of the
Canadian Shield lake country to Northwestern Ontario. The five hundred members of Wabigoon belong to the great Ojibway
Nation of the Great Lakes region of Canada and the United States. It extends west from the Great Lakes to Manitoba, Minnesota
and beyond. Approximately two hundred members of the First Nation live on the Wabigoon reservation and another two
hundred live in the local area.
The members of Wabigoon Lake Ojibway Nation are descendants of signatories of an Indian Treaty with the British Crown in
Right of Canada that covers 55,000 square miles of land. Treaty #3 was signed in October of 1873.
The Wabigoon Lake Ojibway Nation Settlement and Trust Agreements states the beneficiary (Chief and Council) shall distribute
$1,000.00 to every qualifying WLON Band Member that was both alive on the day of the Vote and was a Member on the day of
the Vote, And who has reached the age of eighteen (18) for the purpose of timber claim settlement with Canada.

SUMMARY OF 5 YEAR WORK PLAN APPENDIX F
DEFINITIONS AND PARKS AND PROTECTED

GENERAL PROVISIONS AREAS
ELIGIBILITY AND SELF-GOVERNMENT
ENROLLMENT
ALGONQUIN TAXATION
INSTITUTIONS DISPUTE RESOLUTION
SETTLEMENT LANDS IMPLEMENTATION
CAPITAL TRANSFER AND RATIFICATION PROCESS
LOAN REPAYMENT FOR THE AGREEMENT-IN-
FORESTRY PRINCIPLE
HARVESTING OTHERS

JUSTIN TRUDEAU’S SPEECH IN PARLIAMENT ON APPENDIX G
INHERENT RIGHTS POLICY AND COMPREHENSIVE
POLICY A NEW FRAMEWORK OF SECTION 35
Ottawa, Ontario - February 14, 2018
CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
Mr. Speaker –
I would like to begin by recognizing that we are on the ancestral land of the Algonquin people.
Last September, at the United Nations, I spoke to delegations from around the world and told some hard truths about Canada’s long and complicated
relationship with First Nations, Inuit, and Métis peoples.
I talked about the colonial approach that led to the discriminatory and paternalistic Indian Act.
A colonial approach that systematically ignored the history of the Métis Nation, and denied its peoples their rights.
And that, in the name of Canadian sovereignty, forced the relocation of entire Inuit communities – starving individuals, uprooting families, and causing
generations of harm.
The events I spoke of are, I am confident, well known to every Member of this House.
But what’s notable, Mr. Speaker, is how familiar these tragic events are to Canadians.
You see, I just finished up a series of town hall visits in communities all across Canada.
And everywhere I went, there was at least one person who wanted to know what our government is doing to combat racism, to help advance reconciliation,
and improve the quality of life for Indigenous Peoples.
There were questions about fishing rights, and land claims, and pipeline approvals.
Questions about the national inquiry into missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls, about clean water, and about the alarming number of
Indigenous children in foster care.
These were thoughtful questions, Mr. Speaker.

And it was immediately clear that every time these kinds of questions were asked, the room shifted.
This was, in part, a show of support for the people who stood up and asked some tough questions.
But it was also a signal that these are questions that Canadians want answered.
Questions that strike right at the heart of who we are, and what kind of country we want to be.
And one of those questions is how we, as a government, recognize and implement the rights of Indigenous Peoples.
We’ve seen those questions grow in number and intensity in just this past week, as more and more Canadians come to grips with the fact that we have so
much more work to do.
More work to push back against the systemic racism that is the lived reality for so many Indigenous Peoples.
More work to deal with the fact that too many feel and fear that our country and its institutions will never deliver the fairness, justice, and real reconciliation
that Indigenous Peoples deserve.
But there is reason to be hopeful, Mr. Speaker.
Yesterday, I had the honour of spending some time with Colten Boushie’s family. With his mom Debbie, cousin Jade, and uncle Alvin.
And through all their grief and anger and frustration, their focus was not on themselves and the tragedy they have endured, but on how we must work
together to make the system and our institutions better.
Better for Indigenous youth, for Indigenous families, and for all Canadians.
We have a responsibility to do better. To be better. To do our best to make sure that no family has to endure what they have gone through.
Mr. Speaker, the criminal justice system is just one place in which reforms are urgently needed.
Reforms are needed to ensure that – among other things – Indigenous Peoples might once again have confidence in a system that has failed them all too
often in the past.

That is why we will bring forward broad-based, concrete reforms to the criminal justice system, including changes to how juries are selected.
It’s clear, Mr. Speaker, that Indigenous Peoples and all Canadians know it is past time for change.
At the same time, some view our government’s commitments with some degree of scepticism – and if you look at how things have been handled in the past,
it’s hard to say that that scepticism is misplaced.
After all, it’s not like we are the first government to recognize the need for change, and promise that we’d do things differently.
It’s been more than 20 years since the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples called for “the recognition of Aboriginal Peoples as self-governing nations
with a unique place in Canada.”
More than 30 years have passed since the Penner Report and the First Ministers’ Conferences on the Rights of Aboriginal Peoples.
And last year marked 35 years since Aboriginal and treaty rights were recognized and affirmed through Section 35 of the Constitution Act.
You might recall, Mr. Speaker, that the government of the day – led by my father – did not intend to include these rights at the outset.
It was the outspoken advocacy of First Nations, Inuit, and Métis peoples, supported by non-Indigenous Canadians, that forced the government to reconsider.
Imagine what that must have felt like, Mr. Speaker.
To have fought so hard, for so long, against colonialism. Rallying your communities, reaching out to Canadians, riding the “Constitution Express.” And in the
end, to finally be recognized and included. To see your rights enshrined and protected in the foundational document on which Canada’s democracy rests.
Now imagine the mounting disappointment – the unsurprising and familiar heartache, and the rising tide of anger – when governments that had promised so
much did so little to keep their word.
You see, Mr. Speaker, the challenge – then and now – is that while Section 35 recognizes and affirms Aboriginal and treaty rights, those rights have not been
implemented by our governments.
The work to give life to Section 35 was supposed to be done together with First Nations, Inuit, and Métis Peoples. And while there has been some success,
progress has not been sustained, or carried out.

And so over time, it too often fell to the courts to pick up the pieces, and fill in the gaps.
More precisely, instead of outright recognizing and affirming Indigenous rights – as we promised we would – Indigenous Peoples were forced to prove, time
and time again, through costly and drawn-out court challenges, that their rights existed, must be recognized and implemented.
Indigenous Peoples, like all Canadians, know this must change.
We know it, too.
And that’s why we have been working hard these last two years to renew the relationship with Indigenous Peoples – one based on recognition of rights,
respect, co-operation, and partnership.
We’re on the right track.
We endorsed the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples without qualification, and committed to its full implementation, including
government support for Bill C-262.
We engaged in new Recognition of Rights and Self-Determination negotiations, where the government and Indigenous Peoples work together on the
priorities Indigenous partners say are necessary to advance their vision of self-determination.
We signed agreements with First Nations, Inuit, and the Métis Nation outlining how we will work together to identify each community’s distinct priorities, and
how we will work together to develop solutions.
We established a Working Group of Ministers to review our federal laws, policies, and operational practices to ensure that the Crown is meeting its
constitutional obligations, and adhering to international human rights standards – including the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous
Peoples. 
To guide the work of decolonizing Canadian laws and policies, we adopted principles respecting Canada’s relationship with Indigenous Peoples.  
To preserve, protect, and revitalize Indigenous languages, we are working with Indigenous partners to co-develop a First Nations, Inuit, and Métis Languages
Act.

And last week, we announced reforms to the environmental assessment process for major resource projects, to recognize Indigenous rights and traditional
knowledge, and give Indigenous Peoples more involvement when it comes to development in their communities.
We’ve made changes in order to recognize Indigenous rights and traditional knowledge, and give Indigenous Peoples more involvement when it comes to
development in their communities.
These efforts are an important start, Mr. Speaker, but they are just a start.
To truly renew the relationship between Canada and Indigenous Peoples – not just for today, but for the next 150 years – we need a comprehensive and far-
reaching approach.
We need a government-wide shift in how we do things.
We need to both recognize and implement Indigenous rights because the truth is, Mr. Speaker, until we get this part right, we won’t have lasting success on
the concrete outcomes that we know mean so much to people.
Indigenous Peoples in Canada should be able to drink the water that comes out of their taps.
They should be able to go to sleep in homes that are safe, and not overcrowded.
Indigenous children should be able to stay with their families and communities, where they are known and loved.
And Indigenous youth should not grow up surrounded by the things that place them at elevated risk for suicide – things like poverty, abuse, and limited
access to a good education and good health care.
All of these things demand real, positive action – action that must include the full recognition and implementation of Indigenous rights. We need to get to a
place where Indigenous Peoples in Canada are in control of their own destiny, making their own decisions about their future.
And so today, I am pleased to announce that the government will develop – in full partnership with First Nations, Inuit, and Métis people – a new Recognition
and Implementation of Indigenous Rights Framework that will include new ways to recognize and implement Indigenous Rights.
This will include new recognition and implementation of rights legislation.
Going forward, recognition of rights will guide all government relations with Indigenous Peoples.

The contents of the Framework that we build together will be determined through a national engagement, led by the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations
and Northern Affairs, with support from the Minister of Justice.
Earlier, I cited some of the many studies and reports, and consultations that have come before. And I understand that some may see further consultation as
yet another delay in the struggle for self-determination for Indigenous Peoples.
But let’s be clear, Mr. Speaker. No matter how responsible or well-meaning or thoughtful a solution that comes out of Ottawa might be, it cannot be the
solution if it comes out of Ottawa alone.
We understand that Indigenous Peoples themselves are eager to begin the considerable work of rebuilding their nations and institutions.
Our job as a government is to support, accompany, and partner with First Nations, Inuit, and Métis peoples – to provide the framework and the tools they
need as they chart a path forward, together with all Canadians.
We’ll also be engaging the provinces and territories, and non-Indigenous Canadians: people from civil society, from industry and the business community,
and the public at large. Because all Canadians have a stake in getting this right.
While the results of this engagement will guide what the final Framework looks like, we believe that, as a starting point, it should include new legislation and
policy that would make the recognition and implementation of rights the basis for all relations between Indigenous Peoples and the federal government
moving forward.
This Framework gives us the opportunity to build new mechanisms to recognize Indigenous governments, and ensure rigorous, full and meaningful
implementation of treaties and other agreements.
With this Framework, we have a chance to develop new tools to support the rebuilding of Indigenous communities, nations, and governments; and advance
self-determination, including the inherent right of Self-Government.
This Framework could establish new ways to resolve disputes, so that collaboration becomes the new standard, and conflict the exception rather than the
rule.
By including tools that oblige the federal government to be more transparent and accountable, we can build greater trust between Indigenous Peoples and
government.

And through this new Framework, we can better align Canada’s laws and policies with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, a
declaration our government supports without qualification.
We believe that a Framework that includes measures like these will finally bring to life many of the recommendations made by the Royal Commission on
Aboriginal Peoples, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, and countless other studies and reports over the years.
Mr. Speaker, some may worry that this ambitious approach may require re-opening the Constitution. This is not true.
In fact, by fully embracing and giving life to the existing Section 35 of the Constitution, we will replace policies like the Comprehensive Land Claims Policy
and the Inherent Right to Self-Government Policy with new and better approaches that respect the distinctions between First Nations, Inuit, and Métis
peoples.
This will give greater confidence and certainty to everyone involved.
The federal government’s absence over generations in recognizing and implementing Indigenous rights has resulted in social and economic exclusion,
uncertainty, and litigation – when our shared focus should have always been on creating prosperity and opportunity for everyone.
Better opportunities for Indigenous Peoples, and certainly for Indigenous youth, are precisely what we hope to achieve through this Framework.
Engagement will continue throughout the spring, but it is our firm intention to have the Framework introduced this year, and implemented before the next
election.
This work will involve not only the government, but also this Parliament. Committee work, witnesses, strong debate – in both Houses.
The history of Canada’s relationship with Indigenous Peoples transcends any one government, Mr. Speaker. The Indian Act passed this House. But so did
Section 35. And now, as a Parliament, we have an opportunity – and a responsibility – to finally implement it.
Mr. Speaker, we all know that we cannot erase the past.
We cannot bring back the things that we have lost.
What we can do – what we must do – is commit ourselves to being better, and doing better.

LETTERS TO MEMBERSHIP APPENDIX H











ADVERTISEMENTS/NOTICES APPENDIX I
POSTED
March 16, 2018 April 6, 2018
March 23, 2018

May 25 + June 1, 2018
March 30, 2018

ADVERTISEMENTS/NOTICES APPENDIX I
July 6 & July 13, 2018
July 27 & August 4,

NOTES
___________________________________________ ___________________________________________
___________________________________________ ___________________________________________
___________________________________________ ___________________________________________
___________________________________________ ___________________________________________
___________________________________________ ___________________________________________
___________________________________________ ___________________________________________
___________________________________________ ___________________________________________
___________________________________________ ___________________________________________
___________________________________________ ___________________________________________
___________________________________________ ___________________________________________
___________________________________________ ___________________________________________
___________________________________________ ___________________________________________
___________________________________________ ___________________________________________
___________________________________________ ___________________________________________
___________________________________________ ___________________________________________
___________________________________________ ___________________________________________

PIKWAKANAGAN

Summary Report - ROUND 1

Cargado por

Información del documento

Derechos de autor

Formatos disponibles

Compartir este documento

Compartir o incrustar documentos

Opciones para compartir

¿Le pareció útil este documento?

¿Este contenido es inapropiado?

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

Summary Report - ROUND 1

Cargado por

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

2018

ROUND ONE Negotiations

Q QUESTION Comments, Concerns + Commitments 36 - 40

Page 3 of 92 Land Claim/Treaty Negotiations Update ROUND ONE : SUMMARY REPORT

28 - Commanda, Whiteduck, Baptiste

7 - Kohoko, Benoit, Jocko

18 - Amikons, Aird, Lavalley, Meness

Page 4 of 92 Land Claim/Treaty Negotiations Update ROUND ONE : SUMMARY REPORT

We set out in this first round to address a number of subjects that

Round One of our meetings made every effort to create

Kirby Whiteduck, Chief

Page 5 of 92 Land Claim/Treaty Negotiations Update ROUND ONE : SUMMARY REPORT

Page 6 of 92 Land Claim/Treaty Negotiations Update ROUND ONE : SUMMARY REPORT

Page 7 of 92 Land Claim/Treaty Negotiations Update ROUND ONE : SUMMARY REPORT

Q Why are we accepting contact and colonial

There are legal expectations when proving title that

None of the negotiating parties are seeking

Page 8 of 92 Land Claim/Treaty Negotiations Update ROUND ONE : SUMMARY REPORT

A Yes. The cash component is in 2011 dollars. By the time

Q Has any of the cash settlement already been

A Wateridge Village (formerly known as CFB Rockcliffe)

A It is expected that there will be sound financial

Page 9 of 92 Land Claim/Treaty Negotiations Update ROUND ONE : SUMMARY REPORT

We will be able to assume ownership and control over a

There will never be enough land, but we expect that some

Q Is it possible to get a better deal in this process? Is it the

Page 11 of 92 Land Claim/Treaty Negotiations Update ROUND ONE : SUMMARY REPORT

members of Pikwakanagan. All beneficiaries will have the

Q Can the AOO continue to negotiate without

Page 12 of 92 Land Claim/Treaty Negotiations Update ROUND ONE : SUMMARY REPORT

Q How does Council get a mandate to negotiate

A The amount in the AIP is 300 million, which would be

Page 13 of 92 Land Claim/Treaty Negotiations Update ROUND ONE : SUMMARY REPORT

A This is yet to be negotiated. Details will be in the Self-

Government. will have authority over that land base.

Page 14 of 92 Land Claim/Treaty Negotiations Update ROUND ONE : SUMMARY REPORT

Q What is “fee simple”? ** ◉ ♦

Fee Simple is the highest form of private land

Modern treaties are amended regularly, but the main

A ownership in Canadian law. We are working to see if

Q What is the plans for park lands?

Page 15 of 92 Land Claim/Treaty Negotiations Update ROUND ONE : SUMMARY REPORT

We want to encourage youth to pursue careers that

Is there a legal process or legal realities that we

Page 16 of 92 Land Claim/Treaty Negotiations Update ROUND ONE : SUMMARY REPORT

beneficiaries have to be part of the original nation connection.

“The objective of the negotiations is to protect

Q Is there going to be a blood quantum requirement? ◉

Page 17 of 92 Land Claim/Treaty Negotiations Update ROUND ONE : SUMMARY REPORT

blood? ◉ (ANR) group that works through these committees. We

Page 18 of 92 Land Claim/Treaty Negotiations Update ROUND ONE : SUMMARY REPORT

Q Does AOO give people Aboriginal rights?

Q Are there non-status voters enrolled in AOO that

A Yes, for voting purposes on the AIP. This number will

Page 19 of 92 Land Claim/Treaty Negotiations Update ROUND ONE : SUMMARY REPORT

Q What land is referred to as “Specified Algonquin

A We are seeking recognition and protection of our rights

Page 21 of 92 Land Claim/Treaty Negotiations Update ROUND ONE : SUMMARY REPORT

A Bill S—3 provides flexibility for the Indian Registrar to

When a person is given status, it cannot be taken away.

A We could explore this topic more through Self-

Page 22 of 92 Land Claim/Treaty Negotiations Update ROUND ONE : SUMMARY REPORT

A The Indian Act is Federal legislation and we are not able to

A The beneficiary criteria will be developed by the