Briefing prepared by

After the Occupation:Process Agreement UpdateApril 1, 2015Kate Kempton

2

HISTORY

Treaty 5 (1875):• Signed by Tepastenam• Different understanding of parties:

• Supposed to be about sharing and equality, but means taking and subjugation to Crown

Indian Act (1876)• Racism, dispossession, creation of

Band system

3

HISTORY

Northern Flood Agreement (1977)• Supposed to remedy “taking” and damages from Hydro

development• Not well implemented

Section 35 of Canada’s Constitution• High level status to Aboriginal and Treaty rights under

Canadian law• Has not gone far enough

4

2014 JENPEG OCCUPATION

2014: Crown still taking, NFA still not being implemented, Crown controlling Hydro project.

October 6, 2014 - Letter and Eviction notice to Scott Thompson, CEO  and President, Manitoba Hydro from Chief Catherine Merrick

October 17, 2014 - The people of Pimicikamak evict Manitoba Hydro from the Jenpeg Generation Station on Kichi Sipi  

TIMELINE

November 5, 2014 - Pimicikamak, Manitoba Hydro and Manitoba Sign Memorandum of Agreement

November 27, 2014 - Signed Process Agreement

TIMELINE

Agreement between Pimicikamak, the government of Manitoba and Manitoba Hydro

PROCESS AGREEMENT

Process to address taking and subjugation from Hydro Project. Goals:1. SHARING:

Full NFA implementationRevenue sharing

2. EQUALITY:Mutual NFA implementationCo-management over Hydro operations

PROCESS AGREEMENT

9

3 Parties (Pim, MB, MH):Make major decisions

“Main Table”: Where 3 parties negotiate and

make decisions to implement Northern Flood Agreement

“Working Group” Technical work on workplans,

budgets, plans for revenue sharing, etc.

Brings all work to Main Table for approval

THE “MAIN TABLE”

Main Table

Working Group

Pimicikamak, Manitoba,

Manitoba Hydro

Legally binding on Manitoba and Hydro.Different from 1998 political accord from NFA Crown parties, after road protest.

PROCESS AGREEMENT

Article 6:Improved NFA relationship and implementation, new program funding

Article 7:Policy Issues: revenue sharing, co-management, etc.

Article 8:Improving financial management

PROCESS AGREEMENT

Manitoba and Manitoba Hydro fund Pimicikamak’s work under the Process AgreementProcess costs:

Representatives, lawyers, and experts at Main Table and Working Group

Development of workplans and budget at Working Group

Substance costs: Programs for NFA Article 6, Article 7, Article 8, etc.

Administrative costs: Pimicikamak office and staff

FUNDING

Programs to implement NFA Multiplex planning, softball field, fuel wood, safety monitoring, etc.

Reserve 19D resolutionAccommodation for cumulative effects of Hydro ProjectBipole III work camps: consultation and accommodationFinancial /Management systems for Pimicikamak

DISCUSSIONS THUS FAR

Finalizing 19D settlementStatus of Pimicikamak under the NFA (April)Revenue Sharing (June)

UPCOMING ISSUES

NFA claims still being actively pursued. Some may be settled through negotiations at Main Table.

Ongoing claims: 11 (recreation)34 (employment)43 (land exchange)109 (damages for Nednak road/bridge)131 (navigable waters)164 (health impacts)183 (Jenpeg forebay debris)648 (consultation re: Keeyask)

NFA ARBITRATION CLAIMS

16

QUESTIONS