first nation and métis consultation policy framework

8/9/2019 First Nation and Mtis Consultation Policy Framework

1/33

F i r s t N a t i o n a n d M t i sC o n s u l t a t i o n P o l i c y F r a m e w o r k

June 2010


2/33


3/33

Government of Saskatchewan First Nation and Mtis Consultation Policy Framework

1

Table of ConTenTs

1. Itrducti 2

2. Duty t Cut Picy 3

Policy Statement1

Policy Goal2

Objectives3

Guiding Principles4

3. Th Duty t Cut appid t ld d Rurc 5

a. appicti th Duty t Cut 5

Policy Application1

Decisions Subject to the Duty to Consult Policy2

Matters Not Subject to the Duty to Consult Policy3

Roles and Responsibilities4

Funding Consultation5

Existing Processes for Consultation6

b. Duty t Cut Guidi 9

Purpose1

Consultation Process2Step 1: Pre-Consultation Assessmenta

Step 2: Consultationb

Consultation Matrixc

4. Ctxt r th Duty t Cut 14

Treaty Context1

Treaty Rights Pertaining to the Duty to Consult2

Mtis Aboriginal Rights3

Mtis Aboriginal Rights Pertaining to the Duty to Consult4Asserted Rights5

5. Itrt-d eggmt 16


4/33


2

1. Introduction

The Government of SaskatchewanFirst Nation and Mtis Consultation PolicyFramework(Consultation Policy Framework) presents the Government ofSaskatchewans policy on consultation with First Nations and Mtis communities for

use by Government ministries, agencies, Crown corporations, First Nations, Mtisand proponents It includes the Duty to Consult Policy, a section on the policysapplication to decisions affecting lands and resources, a policy context section anda section on interest-based engagement The Consultation Policy Frameworkwillalso provide direction to Government ministries, agencies and Crown corporationsto establish operational procedures to consistently implement the consultation policyacross Government

In accordance with this Policy Framework, the Government of Saskatchewan isresponsible for determining whether a duty to consult is triggered and if so, thelevel of consultation required In the case of asserted rights, the Government is

also responsible for determining whether there is a credible basis for the claimGovernment decision-makers requiring assistance interpreting this policy, undertakingpre-consultation assessments and developing consultation plans are encouraged tocontact the Aboriginal Consultation Branch, Ministry of First Nations and MtisRelations by e-mailing AboriginalConsultation@govskca or phoning toll-free,1-877-879-7099

Although the focus of this policy is on consultation as it applies to Treaty andAboriginal rights associated with lands and renewable resources, it does not excludeapplication to other Treaty and Aboriginal rights

This policy takes effect June 2010, replacing the Government of SaskatchewanInterim Guide for Consultation with First Nations and Mtis People It will bereviewed and updated when required to ensure consistency with case law, legislationand/or policy


5/33


3

2. Duty to Consult Policy

Policy Statement

The Government of Saskatchewan will consult with and accommodate, asappropriate, First Nations and rights-bearing Mtis communities in advance of

decisions or actions which may adversely impact Treaty and Aboriginal rights

Policy Goal

The goal of this policy is to facilitate mutually benecial relationships among theGovernment of Saskatchewan, First Nations, Mtis and industry that contribute to agrowing provincial economy

objectiveSofthe Dutyto conSult

To respect and protect Treaty and Aboriginal rights by ensuring, through1the consultation process and subsequent decisions, that negative impacts

on these rights and uses are avoided, minimized or mitigated and rights areaccommodated, as appropriate;

To advance the process of reconciliation between Aboriginal and non-2Aboriginal peoples and their respective claims, interests and ambitions; and

To promote certainty, predictability and a stable, secure investment climate for3the residents of Saskatchewan, including First Nation and Mtis communities

GuiDinG PrinciPleS

Integrity and Good Faith

The duty to consult is grounded in the honour of the Crown The Government willapproach consultations with an open mind, conduct itself with integrity duringconsultation processes and deal in good faith with First Nations and Mtis peopleThe Government will listen to and respond to First Nations and Mtis concernsrespecting potential impacts on Treaty or Aboriginal rights and consider them whenmaking decisions

Respect

Consultations with First Nations and Mtis communities will be undertaken in a spiritof mutual respect and trust For example, cultural practices, such as opening prayers,will be respected and traditional knowledge will be taken into consideration As theholders of Treaty and/or Aboriginal rights, the Government does not consider FirstNations and Mtis to be stakeholders


6/33


4

Governments Duty

On matters subject to provincial jurisdiction, the duty to consult lies with theGovernment of Saskatchewan The Government will not delegate the duty to projectproponents or other third parties, although proponents have an important role in theprocedural aspects of consultation processes. Government retains nal decision-making authority; First Nations and Mtis do not have a veto over decisions

Reciprocal Responsibility

There is a reciprocal responsibility on First Nation and Mtis communities toparticipate in the consultation process in good faith, to make their concerns respectingpotential impacts on Treaty and Aboriginal rights known and to respond to theGovernments attempts to consult

Transparency and Accountability

Consultation processes will be transparent, accountable, timely and results-based

Communication

Successful consultation depends on clear, open and honest communication betweenthe Government of Saskatchewan and First Nations and Mtis communities withpotentially impacted rights For example, technical information should be in plainlanguage and translation provided, if necessary


7/33


5

3. The Duty to Consult as Applied to Lands and Resources

A. Application of the Duty to Consult

PolicyaPPlication

This policy applies to Government decisions and actions that have the potential toadversely impact the exercise of:

Treaty and Aboriginal rights, such as the right to hunt, sh and trap for food1on unoccupied Crown lands and other lands to which First Nations and Mtishave a right of access for these purposes; and

Traditional uses of lands and resources, such as the gathering of plants for2food and medicinal purposes and the carrying out of ceremonial and spiritualobservances and practices on unoccupied Crown lands and other lands towhich First Nations and Mtis have a right of access for these purposes

DeciSionS Subjecttothe Dutyto conSult Policy

The duty to consult may be triggered by Government decisions and actions thathave the potential to adversely impact the exercise of Treaty and Aboriginal rightsand pursuit of traditional uses The decisions and actions that will be assessed byGovernment for potential consultation obligations include, but are not limited to, thefollowing:

Legislation, Regulation, Policy and Strategic Plans

Creating a new or amended piece of legislation, regulation, policy or strategic planthat may have the effect of limiting or altering the use of Crown lands and renewableresources

Fish and Wildlife Management

A decision that may limit or alter the quality and quantity of sh and wildlife or theright of access to these resources

Resource Extraction

A decision related to the harvesting and processing of timber or the permitting andlicensing of Crown surface lands for extraction and production of minerals

Land Reservations

Any action that has the effect of restricting the use of unoccupied Crown lands andother lands to which there is a right of access

Land Use Planning

Land use planning activities that provide a long-term framework for Governmentdecisions


8/33


6

Lease, Grant or Sale of Unoccupied Crown Land

Decisions related to the long-term lease, granting or sale of unoccupied Crown land

Changes to Public Access

A decision that will have the effect of changing public access to Crown lands and

renewable resources

Environmental Approval

A decision where an activity has the potential to negatively impact the environment

matterS not Subjecttothe Dutyto conSult Policy

Matters that do not trigger the duty to consult include, but are not limited to, thefollowing:

Past Actions

The Government does not consider the duty to consult to be retroactive and thereforewill not consult on decisions it made in the past

Private Land and Leased Crown Agricultural Land

Private land owners and lessees of Crown agricultural lands have the right to controlaccess to their private or leased lands Treaty and Aboriginal rights and traditionaluses can only be exercised on these lands with the permission of the land owner orlessee Accordingly, decisions related to projects occurring on private lands or leasedCrown agricultural lands are not subject to consultation under this policy unlessthe project has the potential to adversely impact Treaty and Aboriginal rights and

traditional uses on unoccupied Crown lands, occupied Crown lands where the Crownpermits access or Indian reserve lands in the general vicinity

Aboriginal Title

The Government does not accept assertions by First Nations or Mtis that Aboriginaltitle continues to exist with respect to either lands or resources in SaskatchewanAccordingly, decisions claimed to adversely affect Aboriginal title are not subject tothis policy

Mineral Dispositions

The issuance of mineral dispositions underThe Crown Minerals Actis not subject tothis policy These dispositions do not provide the disposition holder with a right ofaccess to lands for purposes of mineral exploration and development This policy will,however, apply where the Government is contemplating surface land use decisionsrelated to mineral exploration and development that may have an impact on Treatyand Aboriginal rights and traditional uses


9/33


10/33


8

First Nations and Mtis Rights-Bearing Communities

First Nations and Mtis are responsible for participating in the consultation processin good faith and in a timely manner, making their concerns known about adverseimpacts on Treaty and Aboriginal rights and traditional uses and responding to theGovernments attempts to consult

Project Proponents

Proponents, by virtue of their knowledge of and participation in project activities,have an important and direct role in the consultation process to ensure bothsuccess and certainty Proponents are expectedto collaborate with Governmentin the provision of project information to potentially impacted First Nations andMtis communities The information must be clear, accurate and complete, and inplain language where possible Proponents may also be expected to participate inGovernment meetings with potentially impacted First Nations and Mtis communitiesto discuss potential impacts of the proposed activity Where an adverse impact onTreaty or Aboriginal rights and/or traditional uses is identied, proponents will beexpected to work with Government and the parties being consulted to develop andimplement measures to address these impacts

Proponents are responsible for the costs associated with their engagement inconsultation processes and procedural aspects that may be assigned to them byGovernment, as well as any necessary adjustments or actions to project activitiesrequired to avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse impacts on Treaty and Aboriginalrights and traditional uses

Successful consultation depends, in part, on early engagement of proponents withFirst Nations and Mtis communities Proponents are encouraged to engage and build

relationships with the affected First Nations and Mtis Establishing relationshipswith First Nations and Mtis communities in advance of pursuing development ofspecic projects has proven to be an effective management practice.

Municipalities

Municipalities are established by provincial legislation and exercise powers delegatedby the Provincial Government Municipalities may have a duty to consult wheneverthey independently exercise their legal authority in a way that might adversely impactthe exercise of Treaty and Aboriginal rights and/or traditional uses on unoccupiedCrown land or other lands to which First Nations and Mtis have a right of access Incases where the municipality is the proponent of a development, the Government can

assign procedural aspects of the consultation to the municipality, as it may with anyother proponent


11/33


9

funDinGforconSultation

The Government recognizes that First Nations and Mtis may require assistanceto engage in meaningful consultations The First Nations and Mtis ConsultationParticipation Fund, administered by the Ministry of First Nations and Mtis Relations,allows eligible First Nations and Mtis entities to participate in consultations wherethe Provincial Government has determined that it has a duty to consult Moreinformation can be found at: http://wwwfnmrgovskca/Consultation-Fund/

exiStinG ProceSSeSforconSultation

Consultations undertaken in accordance with legislative requirements or regulatoryprocesses, such as environmental assessment or land use planning, may be reliedupon by the Crown to satisfy, in whole or in part, the duty to consult In many cases,the duty to consult is carried out on a continuum from one decision-making stage toanother, within ministries and across ministries

B. Duty to Consult Guidelines

PurPoSe

The purpose of the Duty to Consult Guidelines is to provide consistent direction to allparties who are likely to use the Duty to Consult Policy, with the objective of havingsuccessful consultations The Guidelines will also provide those ministries, agenciesand Crown corporations that have consultation obligations with sufcient guidance todevelop operational implementation procedures specic to their unique mandate andactivities

conSultation ProceSS

stp 1: Pr-Cutti amt

Determining if consultation is required

The threshold for triggering the duty to consult is low The courts have ruled that thenature, scope and intensity of the consultation required will vary along a spectrumaccording to the potential impact on rights arising from a Government activity ordecision

When determining if consultation is required, and the subsequent level of consultationactivity that may be appropriate, Government will consider:

If the decision or action being contemplated has the potential to adversely1

impact a Treaty and/or Aboriginal right and/or traditional use;The duration or length of time the potential adverse effect may persist; and2

The magnitude or extent of the potential adverse impact3


12/33


10

The Consultation Matrix set out in Figure 1 will guide Government assessment onthe level of consultation and time frames If it is not clear whether an activity triggersa consultation requirement, Government ministries and agencies are advised toundertake a Level 2 Consultation as described in the Consultation Matrix

Figure 1: Consultation MatrixPtti Impct

Dcii r acti Trty d arigiRight d Trditi

U

lv Cutti

Notifcation and

fw upTimi

rrp

rm firtnti/

Mti

aticiptdTimi rGvrmt

Dciirm Dy Notifcation

No impact leVel 1 No notication is requiredbeyond what is typicallyprovided to the public or isrequired by legislation

N/A N/A

Short-term disturbanceto land and/or change inresource availability with

potentially minor impact

leVel 2 Written notice is provided Responserequestedwithin 21days

Decisionanticipatedwithin 30 days

Short-term disturbance toland and/or a change inresource availability witha potentially signicantimpactORLong-term disturbanceto land and/or change inresource availability and/or

permanent uptake of landwith a potentially minorimpact

leVel 3 Written notice is provided withoffer to meet with community todiscuss project and seek input

Follow up is not required, butmay be appropriate

Responserequestedwithin 30days


Reporting backis not required

but may beappropriate

Long-term disturbanceto land and/or change inresource availability witha potentially signicantimpact

leVel 4 Contact First Nation and/orMtis community to advise ofupcoming review and ofcialnotication to follow.

Written notice is provided withoffer to meet with community todiscuss project and seek input

Follow up is required



Reporting backis required

Permanent disturbanceto land and/or change inresource availability and/or permanent uptake ofland with a potentiallysignicant impact.

leVel 5 Contact First Nation and/orMtis community to advise ofupcoming review and ofcialnotication to follow.Written notice is provided withoffer to meet with communityto discuss project, develop aconsultation plan and determinecapacity needs

Follow up is required


Decisionanticipated toexceed 90 days

Reporting backis required


13/33


11

The Government recognizes that there is a duty to consult in connection with thetaking up or sale of Crown land as a result of the Supreme Courts decision inMikisew Cree The Government will assess the level of consultation required inthese cases by examining the potential adverse impacts on the exercise of Treatyand Aboriginal rights and traditional uses Where it is contemplated that the adverseimpact will be minor, consultations will be assessed at Level 3 Where the adverse

impacts will be signicant, consultations will be assessed at Level 5.

When the decision under consideration is the renewal, extension or transfer of anexisting disposition, only potential new adverse impacts on Treaty and Aboriginalrights and traditional uses will be considered in determining if consultations arerequired and what level of consultation is required Where the renewal or extension isprovided for in the original disposition and no changes to the authorized activity arecontemplated, consultations will be assessed at a Level 1

Identifying Potentially Impacted First Nations and Mtis

Consultation is required with First Nations and rights-bearing Mtis communitieswhose traditional territories coincide with the geographic area where the adverseimpact would occur Traditional territory refers to the geographic area within whichFirst Nations and Mtis people historically exercised Treaty and Aboriginal rights andundertook traditional uses and continue to do so today There may be circumstances inwhich more than one First Nation and/or Mtis community must be consulted owingto overlapping traditional territories

Treaty and Aboriginal rights are collective rights held by a community of peopleConsultations must therefore be targeted to the elected leaders or representativesof First Nations and Mtis communities For the purpose of these guidelines, the

Government recognizes the Chief and Council of a First Nation, the President ofa Mtis Nation - Saskatchewan Local or their authorized designates Regional orprovincial First Nations and Mtis entities may be consulted only if the electedleadership has delegated this authority through its constitutional decision-makingprocess, and the consulting ministry has a written, signed copy of the authorization

When in doubt as to whom to consult, Tribal Councils or the Mtis Nation -Saskatchewan provincial head ofce may be contacted for advice.

stp 2: Cutti

Providing Notice

Notication will be provided in writing to the leadership in the First Nations andMtis communities that may potentially be adversely affected by a Governmentdecision or action, or their delegates as noted above. Notication must be as earlyas possible and in advance of the decision to be made and may require the activeparticipation of the proponent


14/33


12

Notication should provide clear, complete and understandable information andinclude the following:

Description of the decision or action that Government is contemplating thatcould adversely impact Treaty or Aboriginal rights;

The extent, and likely duration of the impact on rights and traditional uses;

Specic questions about the information being requested on impacts to Treatyand Aboriginal rights and traditional uses;

Identication of a timeline for response from the community and theanticipated timeline for a Government decision following notication;

An assessment of likely impacts on the environment and/or renewableresources; and

Identication of any mechanisms that will be applied to mitigate potentialimpacts

In keeping with the Consultation Matrix in Figure 1, adequate time should be allowed

for the First Nations and/or Mtis leadership to receive, consider and respond to thenotication. Additional follow-up methods such as phone calls, registered letters orpersonal visits can be used as appropriate to ensure the First Nations and/or Mtiscommunities are aware of the proposal

Considering the Response

The First Nations and/or Mtis response to Governments notication may conrmthe Governments preliminary assessment of the potential impact of the proposeddecision or action on Treaty and Aboriginal rights and traditional uses In this case, adecision will be made to proceed, subject to appropriate mitigative measures

Alternatively, the response may provide Government with a better understandingof potential impacts on Treaty and Aboriginal rights and traditional uses. Specicsteps can then be taken to avoid, minimize or mitigate the impacts of its decisions oractions on those rights and uses The Government response to concerns expressed byFirst Nations and/or Mtis about potential impacts to the exercise of specic rightsand/or traditional uses will be unique to the particular facts of the situation Projectproponents must be made aware that the content of the response(s) from First Nationsand/or Mtis community(ies) may affect the timelines for a decision

Consultation may result in new information being identied. That information willthen be applied to re-assess the impact or extent of the potential impact, and may

elevate the level of consultation required Such reassessment may result in newconsultation activities and adjustments to associated timelines

There may be circumstances where the First Nations or Mtis response to theGovernment notication is an adverse impact to an asserted right not covered in thispolicy In these cases, guidance should be sought from the Ministry of First Nationsand Mtis Relations


15/33


13

Accommodating

An outcome of consultation could be actions to accommodate Treaty and/orAboriginal rights and/or traditional uses Accommodation means that the Governmentand the proponent will use what they have learned about impacts to rights andtraditional uses during the consultation process to minimize or avert the adverseimpacts by avoiding, changing, or amending the plan or action In the event that aplan or development requires alteration, the proponent will be responsible for costs

Accommodation may include one or more of the following:

attaching certain conditions to approvals to undertake activities;

requiring proponents to adjust the proposed activity or program;

delaying making a decision or issuing an approval pending furtherconsultations; or

denying the application to conduct an activity

In instances where a Government decision or action results in a signicant,unavoidable infringement on Treaty and Aboriginal rights, nancial compensationmay be required for loss of use or access to exercise the right Government willdetermine compensation on a case-by-case basis and will not address past actions

Reporting Back

In keeping with guidance in the Consultation Matrix in Figure 1, the Governmentwill report back to the First Nations and Mtis leadership being consulted as to itsdecision The report will explain the rationale for the decision, how First Nations and/or Mtis concerns regarding impacts to Treaty and Aboriginal rights and traditionaluses were taken into consideration and, where relevant, what form of accommodation

was used to avoid or minimize impacts to those rights


16/33


14

4. Context for the Duty to Consult

This section provides background information to assist the reader to understand thepolicy content and Government direction

treaty contextTreaties are living, breathing documents that continue to bind us to promises madegenerations ago1 There are six different Treaties applicable in Saskatchewan TreatyNos 2, 4, 5, 6, 8 and 10 The earliest of these Treaties, No 2, was entered into in1871 The purpose of the Treaties was to forge a new relationship between the Crownand First Nations and to open up the West for developments, like the construction ofthe transcontinental railway and agricultural settlement The terms of each of theseTreaties are similar According to their written text, in exchange for giving up theirtitle to the land, the First Nations received promises of reserve lands, guaranteedhunting, shing and trapping rights, annual payments and other commitments. Theoral histories of the First Nations offer a different view of the intent of the Treaties It

is not the purpose of this Policy to attempt to resolve these differences

treaty riGhtS PertaininGtothe Dutyto conSult

From the Provinces perspective, the Treaty right that is most often engaged inconnection with the duty to consult is the Treaty right to hunt, sh and trap for food.While the wording of this clause varies slightly from Treaty to Treaty, the clause inTreaty No 6 is representative It provides as follows:

Her Majesty further agrees with Her said Indians that they, the said Indians, shall

have right to pursue their avocations of hunting and shing throughout the tract

surrendered as hereinbefore described, subject to such regulations as may from

time to time be made by Her Government of Her Dominion of Canada, and saving

and excepting such tracts as may from time to time be required or taken up for

settlement, mining, lumbering or other purposes by Her said Government of the

Dominion of Canada, or by any of the subjects thereof duly authorized therefore

by the said Government2

These rights may be exercised on unoccupied Crown lands and other lands to whichFirst Nations have a right of access for hunting, shing and trapping throughoutthe Province by virtue of the provisions of paragraph 12 of theNatural ResourcesTransfer Agreementof 1930 which was the legal instrument that transferredadministration and control of Crown lands from Canada to Saskatchewan The duty toconsult requires consultations with those First Nations whose traditional territories are

potentially impacted by a proposed decision

1 Speech from the Throne, 2007, Province of Saskatchewan, December 2007.2 Treaty 6, Indian Claims Commission: http://wwwindianclaimsca/publications/treaties-enasp


17/33


15

aboriGinal riGhtS

While Treaty rights are enshrined in agreements between the Crown and FirstNations, Aboriginal rights reect the fact that Aboriginal communities existed inNorth America prior to the arrival of Europeans Aboriginal rights encompass thecustoms, practices and traditions that were an integral part of the distinctive culturesof these communities prior to their rst contact with Europeans and which continueto have this signicance in their cultures today. Even though distinctive Mtiscommunities did not arise until after contact between Europeans and First Nations,Mtis also possess Aboriginal rights These rights are determined by examining thecustoms, practices and traditions that were an integral part of the distinctive cultureof Mtis communities at the date when a European or Canadian government assertedeffective control over the area and which continue to have this signicance in theculture today Aboriginal rights have always existed as part of the common law inCanada Aboriginal rights were given constitutional status by section 35(1) of theConstitution Act, 1982 The courts have recognized that Mtis Aboriginal rights tohunt, sh and trap for food exist in some parts of the Province, such as in NorthernSaskatchewan

mtiSaboriGinal riGhtS PertaininGtothe Dutyto conSult

The Government recognizes that it has legal obligations to consult with rights-bearing Mtis communities The Mtis Aboriginal right that is most often engaged inconnection with the duty to consult is the Aboriginal right to hunt, sh and trap forfood One of the challenges associated with meeting the duty to consult for the Mtisis the lack of consensus on the denition of a rights-bearing Mtis community. Todate, the courts suggest that these communities should be dened on a regional basis,as opposed to an individual community or a province-wide basis The Governmentwill consult with Mtis leadership in communities or regions where Mtis Aboriginalrights have already been recognized, such as in Northern Saskatchewan Where Mtis

Aboriginal rights have not yet been recognized, the decision to consult will be madeon a case-by-case basis Government will take into account the strength of the claimssupporting the asserted rights and the extent of the potential impact on the exercise ofthe asserted rights

aSSerteD riGhtS

The Supreme Court recognized inHaida Nation that governments may be requiredto consult with First Nations and Mtis communities when governments haveknowledge, real or constructive, of asserted rights, even if governments do notrecognize the rights being asserted In these cases, consultations may be requiredwhere the Government determines that there is a credible basis for the asserted

right and the community is actively pursuing recognition of the right either throughnegotiations or litigation The degree of consultations required in these cases willdepend upon the strength of the claim supporting the asserted right as well as theextent of the potential adverse impact from the proposed government action


18/33


16

5. Interest-based Engagement

The Government of Saskatchewan recognizes the benets of engaging First Nationsand Mtis when making decisions that affect their interests, people and communities

There are important reasons to engage First Nations and Mtis communities onissues that affect them, outside of any legal consultation obligations the Governmentmay have For many years, governments have been engaging citizens, stakeholdersand First Nations and Mtis communities and organizations as a matter of choice,in order to understand and integrate their interests into government decisions Thisengagement is interest-based rather than rights-based

The primary objective in undertaking interest-based engagement is to ensure thatGovernment policies, plans and actions will effectively meet their intended goals andobjectives This is done by working with the particular group/s to better understandthe nature of the policy problem and how it should be resolved Engagement comes

in many forms, such as information-sharing meetings, public hearings and meetings,advisory groups, surveys and polls and focus groups. In many cases, there is benetin going beyond this kind of engagement to creating partnerships for joint action tosolve a problem or take advantage of an opportunity

Good interest-based engagement includes taking time to develop and maintainpositive relations with First Nations and Mtis communities Both public and privatesectors have realized that engaging Aboriginal people early, well before makingpolicies or decisions, can avoid problems, delays and ultimately resources required tomanage conict.

Ministries will make best efforts to engage First Nations and Mtis communitiesin the decision-making processes related to policies, programs and legislation thathave the potential to directly impact them, where they have an interest or where FirstNations have jurisdiction on-reserve. However, there may be situations where eitherthe sensitive nature of a proposed policy change or its broad application may preventthe Government from consulting with any community in advance


19/33


20/33


21/33

Report on How Feedback was Addressed

in the Government of Saskatchewan

First Nations and Mtis Consultation Policy Framework

June 2010


22/33


23/33

1

Introduction

During the past two years the Government of Saskatchewan has been engaged in a processto revisit the guidelines on First Nation and Mtis consultation. The participation of First

Nations and Mtis leadership, industry representatives, the municipal sector and other

interested groups has been vitally important to this process. Government has listened toyour comments and concerns through this process and, where possible, included them inthe newFirst Nations and Mtis Consultation Policy Framework(CPF).

The purpose of this document is to provide a summary of the feedback received by the

Government on the December 2008Draft First Nation and Mtis Consultation PolicyFramework, and show how it was used in drafting the final policy.

Background

Prior to the November 2007 Provincial election, Premier Brad Wall, then Leader of the

Opposition, committed to a review of the Governments approach to consultation withFirst Nations and Mtis. The Ministry of First Nations and Mtis Relations (FNMR) led

the review process on behalf of Government. The May 2008 Roundtable Conference onFirst Nations and Mtis Consultation and Accommodation was held to receive input from

First Nations, Mtis, industry, municipal sector and others. More than 400representatives of these groups attended the conference. Further information was

received at subsequent summits and meetings with tribal councils, Treaty organizations,the Mtis - Nation Saskatchewan (MNS), industry and municipal associations.

Government then released itsDraft First Nation and Mtis Consultation Policy

Frameworkon December 22, 2008 (December 2008 draft policy) for further feedback.The draft took into consideration input received at the Roundtable, as well as papers

provided by First Nations, Mtis and industry representative groups. It was mailed toapproximately 250 individuals including the Chiefs of all First Nations, tribal councils

and the Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations (FSIN); Mtis Local Presidents,Mtis Regional Directors and the Executive of the MNS; chief executive officers of

companies and industry associations impacted by consultation, in particular mining, oiland gas and forestry; and municipal sector representatives. The document was also

placed on FNMRs website allowing comment from other interested parties.

In response to requests from some respondents for more time to effectively review thedraft policy, the two-month review period was extended to a five-month period, ending

June 1, 2009. Information received from the FSIN and MNS after that date was alsotaken into consideration. In December 2009, the Government indicated that it would

defer releasing the policy until after March 31, 2010 in order to receive consultationpolicies it understood were to be forthcoming from the FSIN and MNS and to have the

opportunity for discussion with the organizations on their respective policies.


24/33

2

Who Responded to the December 2008 Draft Policy?

In developing the new policy, FNMR considered responses from several interestedgroups. They were:

Seven Saskatchewan First Nations: English River First Nation, Big Island Lake CreeNation, Beardys and Okemasis First Nation, Birch Narrows Dene Nation, GordonFirst Nation, Sweetgrass First Nation, Moosomin First Nation;

Cold Lake First Nations, Alberta; Two Treaty Groups: Participating Treaty 6 First Nations and Treaty 4 First Nations

in Saskatchewan and Manitoba, together representing approximately 50 First Nations;

Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations; Mtis Nation Saskatchewan; Two municipal organizations: Saskatchewan Urban Municipalities Association and

Saskatchewan Rural Municipalities Association;

Seven companies and industry associations: Saskatchewan Mining Association, CanadianAssociation of Petroleum Producers, Enbridge Inc., Husky Energy, Weyerhaeuser, Small

Explorers and Producers of Canada, and Saskatchewan Chamber of Commerce; and One individual: PhD Candidate, University of Manitoba.

What We Heard

The feedback and recommendations provided by respondents on the December 2008

draft policy submitted to FNMR were carefully reviewed and categorized into broadthematic groups as part of the analysis of the overall content. While a summary of the

feedback can be found in Table 1, the main thematic groups are: Greater clarity in relation to how the Government intends on assessing when the duty

to consult is triggered and, if so, what level of consultation is required for thepurposes of fulfilling that duty.

More detailed information and clarity respecting the types of decisions subject to theconsultation policy and the rights that may be affected by these decisions.

A greater level of attention to important policy implementation mechanisms such asconsultation participation funding, traditional territory mapping and consultation

protocols, which may improve efficiency.

The provision of clearer definition of accommodation, including accommodationoptions available to decision-makers and the parties responsible for providingaccommodation, including financial compensation.

A clearer definition of the roles and responsibilities of the parties involved inconsultation processes, including those of First Nations, Mtis, industry and

municipalities. Greater clarity around timeframes and timelines associated with the consultation

process, including information on how the Government intends on enforcingtimelines.

The need for consultation to be directly linked to constitutional rights, resourcerevenue-sharing, consent on decisions, inclusion of mineral dispositions, pastdecisions and requirement for economic accommodation and compensation.


25/33

3

Both the FSIN and MNS formally rejected the December 2008 draft, the FSIN byresolution at its Legislative Assembly on February 18, 2009 and the MNS at a meeting of

the Provincial Mtis Council, February 22 - 23, 2009. However, FNMR received adocument from the FSIN dated August 27, 2009 entitled The Duty to Consult First

Nations, which includes 10 Treaty Implementation Principles and 16 legal principles

established by the courts on the duty to consult. As well, in August 2009, MNS providedFNMR with a draft document entitled Mtis Nation Saskatchewan: Duty to Consultand Accommodate Policy and Principles which was approved by the Provincial Mtis

Council, but not the Mtis Nation Legislative Assembly held in November 2009. Boththese documents were considered in the policy development process.

How Input was Addressed in the Government of Saskatchewan FirstNations and Mtis Consultation Policy Framework

Table 1 provides a more detailed breakdown of the main issues and concerns raised by

respondents during the review period and how they were addressed in the final CPF.A summary of how the CPF compares with the key principles in the FSIN and MNS

documents appears in Table 2.

Table 1: Summary of Feedback and How It Was AddressedFeedback Common Among Respondents How Addressed in the CPF1. Most respondents wanted greater clarity on

how Government assesses when the duty is

triggered, the criteria for project size and

type, and what level of consultation is

required.

2. First Nations, industry and municipalitieswanted the policy to address private lands

and leased agricultural Crown lands. This is

important to industry when developments

cross these lands.

3. First Nations, Mtis, industry, municipalitiesand Crown corporations wanted the policy to

address sacred sites and/or traditional uses.

4. First Nations and industry stated thatclarification is required regarding the link

between the duty to consult and regulatory

processes such as environmental assessment

and land use planning.

1. The CPF includes a list of decisions subject to anassessment for consultation obligations as well as

matters not subject to the policy. Further detail on

this assessment is provided in the Consultation

Matrix. These concerns will also be addressed in

greater detail in the ministries operational

procedures when they are developed or updated.

2. The CPF includes a section explaining how thepolicy to consult applies or does not apply to

private lands and leased agricultural Crown lands.

3. Potential adverse impacts on traditional uses oflands and resources is included in the policy

application. Traditional uses includes gathering

plants for food and medicinal purposes and

carrying out ceremonial and spiritual observances

and practices on unoccupied Crown lands and

other lands to which First Nations and Mtis havea right of access for these purposes.

4. The CPF includes a statement that theconsultations undertaken to satisfy regulatory

processes, such as environmental assessment and

land use planning, may also satisfy, in whole or in

part, the duty to consult.


26/33

4

5. Industry felt the time periods for notificationand consultations were too long, First

Nations believed them to be too short.

6. First Nations and industry felt that economicbenefit sharing, environmental stewardship,

traditional territory mapping and traditional

use studies, appropriate capacity and dispute

resolution were important factors for

successful consultation.

7. First Nations and industry wanted moreexamples, options and/or mechanisms for

accommodation.

5. Timelines were adjusted to reflect the level ofconsultation required and a compromise between

industry and First Nation interests. Parties are

required to use best efforts to adhere to them.

Proponents are encouraged to begin early in the

pre-planning and planning stages with information

sharing and relationship-building.

6. These matters will be addressed in the ExploratoryPhase.

7. The CPF provides the various forms ofaccommodation that could be considered.

First Nations and Mtis Feedback How Addressed in the CPF1. First Nations wanted to see reference to

sacred sites and use of traditional knowledge

in consultation.

2. Most First Nations stated that the CPF needsto include consultation on mineral

disposition, and a requirement for economic

accommodation.

3. Consultation needs to include compensationfor past infringements and First Nationconsent to developments.

1. These are now recognized in the CPF as noted in#3 above.

2. The CPF confirms that Governments issuance ofmineral dispositions underThe Crown Minerals

Actwill not trigger the policy. Matters related to

economic accommodation are not addressed in

the policy. Sharing in the Provinces economic

growth will be discussed as part of the Exploratory

Phase

3. The CPF generally does not apply to decisions andactions that have occurred in the past andspecifically provides that compensation will not be

provided for past actions. The policy states that in

instances where a Government decision or action

results in a significant, unavoidable infringement

on Treaty and Aboriginal rights, financial

compensation may be required for loss of use or

access to exercise the right. Government will

determine compensation on a case-by-case basis

and will not address past actions.

The CPF specifically provides that Government

retains final decision-making authority and that

First Nations and Mtis do not have a veto.


27/33

5

4. The concept of a consultation assessmentmatrix aligning intensity of consultation with

intensity of impact was generally endorsed.

However, there was an issue with

Government undertaking the initial

assessment unilaterally and with the draft

matrix focusing on scope of Government

activity rather than impact on rights.

5. First Nations and Mtis said that industryshould be required to enter into agreements

with them to derive benefits from activity in

their traditional territory, including training,

employment, contracts, equity participation

and profit-sharing.

6. First Nations want free, prior and informedconsent.

7. First Nations and Mtis are concerned aboutthe cumulative environmental impacts of

development on the environment and erosion

of the ability to exercise their rights.

4. The Consultation Matrix focuses on the impact onthe exercise of rights and traditional uses as

opposed to the scope of the activity. The CPF still

provides for Government to initially make an

assessment about the level of consultation required

in a particular case but specifically acknowledges

that any new information received from First

Nations and Mtis will be used to reassess the

impact and may elevate the level of consultation

required.

5. The CPF does not require industry to enter intothese sorts of agreements with First Nations and

Mtis. Industry engagement with First Nations

and Mtis will be further examined in the

Exploratory Phase.

6. The CPF does not provide for consent and statesthat First Nations and Mtis do not have a veto

over Government decisions.

7. Cumulative environmental impacts are notspecifically addressed in the CPF; however, they

may be considered in the Pre-Consultation

Assessment to assist in determining the level of

consultation required and may also be raised by

First Nations and Mtis as part of their responses

during consultation processes, at which time they

will be seriously considered.

Municipality Sector Feedback How Addressed in the CPF1. Municipal sector representatives had the

view that, if municipalitieshave a duty toconsult, it is delegated by the Province who

must provide funds to them to undertake

consultation.

1. The CPF states that municipalities may have aduty to consult whenever they independentlyexercise their legal authority in a way that might

adversely impact the exercise of Treaty and

Aboriginal rights and/or traditional uses on

unoccupied Crown land. Municipalities may also

be proponents and would have responsibilities as

outlined in the CPF.

Industry and Crown CorporationFeedback How Addressed in the CPF1. Some industry sectors supported delegation

of procedural aspects to proponents while

others did not support delegation.

2. Industry wanted more information on whattriggers consultation.

1. The CPF states that Government will not delegateits responsibility for consultation; however the

CPF provides that Government may assign to

proponents procedural aspects of consultations,such as information-sharing. Any related costs

would be the proponents responsibility.

2. A list of the types of decisions that may triggerand that dont trigger consultation is provided in

the CPF.


28/33

6

3. Industry raised concerns about the need forclarity around who pays for compensation

and accommodation, where it is determined

that rights are impacted.

4. Industry endorsed the consultation matrixconcept but wanted more definition and

clarity in it to enable them to determine what

kind of consultation and timelines to expect.

5. Industry wanted to know how the policywould apply to past decisions and actions,

and permit renewals, extensions or transfers.

3. The CPF states that proponents will pay the costsof their engagement in consultation processes and

procedures that may be assigned to them, as well

as costs of adjustments to projects to avoid or

lessen impacts on rights. In instances where a

Government decision or action results in a

significant, unavoidable infringement on Treaty

and Aboriginal rights, financial compensation may

be required for loss of use or access to exercise the

right. Government will determine compensation

on a case-by-case basis and will not address past

actions.

4. The Consultation Matrix was reconfigured foradditional clarity, however, it could not address

the many kinds of specific exploration and

development projects possible on the land. When

finalized, ministries operational procedures

should provide another level of detail.

5. The CPF is not retroactive and does not addresspast decisions or actions. The renewal, extension

or transfer of an existing disposition does not

automatically trigger the duty. Only new potential

adverse impacts on rights and traditional uses will

be considered when determining if consultation is

required and at what level.

Table 2: Comparison of Key Points in FSIN and MNS Documents with theGovernment of SaskatchewanFirst Nations and MtisConsultation Policy

FrameworkFederation of Saskatchewan IndianNations: The Duty to Consult FirstNations, August 27, 2009 document,Legal Principles Section

How Addressed in the CPF

1. Consultation is an ongoing process and isalways required. (Haida)

2. Consultation is a two-way street withobligations on each side. (Ryan, Halfway

River)

1. Consultation is not always required for everyGovernment decision; however, the policy will be

triggered by Government decisions and actions that

have the potential to adversely impact the exercise

of Treaty and Aboriginal rights and traditional

uses.

2. The CPF deals with the obligations of Governmentto consult and recognizes under the Guiding

Principles that First Nations and Mtis have a

reciprocal responsibility to participate in good faith

and make their concerns known to Government.


29/33

7

3. Consultation and accommodation areconstitutional obligations. (Kapp)

4. First Nations input must be seriouslyconsidered, substantially addressed and, as

the context requires, may require

accommodation. (Mikisew, Halfway River)

5. Stakeholder processes will not be sufficientto discharge the Crowns duty to consult

(Mikisew) nor will public processes open to

First Nations, such as participation in public

hearings, be sufficient to discharge the

Crowns duty to consult. (Dene Tha)

6. The Crown has a positive obligation toprovide full information on an ongoing

basis, so that First Nations can understand

potential impacts of decisions on their rights

(Jack, Sampson, Halfway) and such

information must be responsive to what the

Crown understands to be the concerns of the

First Nations (Mikisew).

7. The Crown must properly discharge both itsprocedural and substantive duties in any

consultation process (Mikisew) and a failure

to properly satisfy process-related concerns

of First Nations, irrespective of the ultimate

impact on substantive rights, may be a basis

upon which a decision can be struck down

(Mikisew).

8.

The Crown must have sufficient, credibleinformation in decision-making and must

take into account the long term sustainability

of s. 35 rights (Roger William).

3. The CPF is premised on the understanding that theduty to consult is a constitutional obligation. The

CPF sets out the policy Government will follow in

order to meet its obligations. The CPF goes

beyond Governments strict legal obligations with

respect to certain matters, such as inclusion of

traditional uses.

4. The CPF generally affirms that First Nations andMtis input must be taken seriously and that

specific steps should be taken to avoid, minimize or

mitigate the impact of decisions on Aboriginal and

Treaty rights including, in some instances,

accommodation.

5. Where there might be an adverse impact onAboriginal or Treaty rights or traditional uses, the

CPF does not consider First Nations and/or Mtis

to be mere stakeholders. The CPF does provide

that Government may consider opportunities for

First Nation and Mtis consultation that areavailable within the existing regulatory processes,

such as environmental assessment or land use

planning, to satisfy in whole, or in part, the duty to

consult.

6. The Guiding Principles and the ConsultationProcess outlined in the CPF are built on openness,

integrity and good faith. The CPF requires that the

notification provided to First Nations and Mtis be

Clear, complete and understandable and that it

provides information on the extent and likely

duration on any impacts on rights and traditional

uses. As well, the project proponent may be askedto provide specific information on the project and

its scope.

7. The CPF sets out how the Government will fulfillboth its procedural and substantive obligations with

respect to the duty to consult. The CPF does not

address the consequences of any failure to follow

the process that it sets out as this is a legal issue

that would have to be addressed by the courts.

8. The CPF provides that Government must notify FirstNations and Mtis about pending decisions that couldadversely affect Aboriginal and Treaty rights and

traditional uses in order to obtain the necessary

information to make well informed decisions and

requires Government to seriously consider the

information received from First Nations and Mtis.

Government decisions must take into account various

interests, including Treaty rights.


30/33

8

9. The purpose of consultation is reconciliationand not simply the minimization of adverse

impacts (Dene Tha).

10. Consultation must take place early, beforeimportant decisions are made at the

strategic planning stage (Haida, Dene Tha,

Squamish Nation).

11. Consultation cannot be postponed to the lastand final point of a series of decisions

(Squamish Nation).

12. Consultation is required in respect of thedesign of the consultation process itself

(Huu-ay-aht).

13. First Nations must be consulted about thedesign of environmental and regulatory

review processes (Dene Tha).

14. Consultation cannot just be in respect ofsite specific impacts of development but

must also focus on the cumulative impacts,

derivative impacts, and possible injurious

affection resulting from development (Dene

Tha, Taku River, Mikisew, Roger William).

15. The Crown must approach consultation withan open mind and must be prepared to alter

decisions depending on the input received

(Haida).

9. One of the objectives of the CPF is to advance theprocess of reconciliation between Aboriginal and

non-Aboriginal peoples and their respective claims,

interests and ambitions.

10. The CPF states, Notification must be as early aspossible and in advance of the decision to be

made.

11. The CPF provides that Government must initiateconsultation as early as possible and in advance of

the decision to be made and emphasizes that the

proponents should engage First Nations and Mtis

early and prior to pursuing specific projects.

12. In cases where there will be permanent uptake oralteration of land and/or permanent change in

resource availability with a potentially significant

impact, a Level 5 Consultation is required. TheCPF instructs that written notice is provided with

offer to meet with the community to discuss

project, develop a consultation plan and determine

capacity needs.

13. Where Level 5 consultations are required and theGovernment intends to rely upon existing

regulatory processes such as environmental

assessment and land use planning to fu lfill the

policy, in whole or in part, First Nations and Mtis

will be consulted about the design of the process

and the role they will have.

14. The CPF does not specifically address cumulativeimpacts, but this is a factor that may be taken into

account in determining the level of consultation

required with respect to any specific decision. First

Nations and Mtis can also raise concerns about

cumulative impacts during consultations and the

CPF commits the Government to seriously consider

those concerns.

15. The CPFs Guiding Principles say the Governmentwill approach consultations with an open mind,

conduct itself with integrity during consultation

processes and deal in good faith with First Nationsand Mtis. The Government will listen to and

consider seriously First Nations and Mtis concerns

respecting potential impacts on Treaty or

Aboriginal rights and traditional uses when making

decisions.


31/33

9

16. Consultation cannot be determined simplyby whether or not a particular process was

followed, but on whether the results are

reasonable in light of the information

presented, degree of impacts, and related

matters (Wilitsxw).

16. An objective of the CPF is to respect and protectTreaty and Aboriginal rights by ensuring, through

the consultation process and subsequent decisions,

that negative impacts on these rights and uses are

avoided, minimized or mitigated and rights and

traditional uses are accommodated, as appropriate.

The CPF is not simply about process but rather is

intended to ensure that Government receives the

information that it needs about the potential impact

of pending decisions on Treaty and Aboriginal

rights and traditional uses in order to make fully

informed and reasonable decisions, with the

recognition that Government decisions must take

into account and balance a number of competing

interests in addition to the impacts on r ights and

traditional uses.

Mtis Nation Saskatchewan: Duty toConsult and Accommodate Policy andPrinciples. Section 1.2 Consultation andAccommodation Principles

How Addressed in the CPF

1. The fulfillment of the duty requires goodfaith on the part of all parties and

consultations must be conducted in an

equitable, transparent and respectful manner.

2. Timelines must be reasonable and providesufficient opportunity for the parties to

exchange, review and assess information

developed through a duty to consult activity.

3. The Crown must recognize and support theunique capacity needs and realities of the

Mtis people and their elected governance

structures at the local, regional and

provincial levels and provide necessary

funds.

1. The Guiding Principles in the CPF set out that theGovernment will approach consultations with an

open mind, conduct itself with integrity during

consultation processes and deal in good faith with

First Nations and Mtis people and that

consultations will be undertaken in a spirit of

mutual respect and trust and be transparent.

2. The CPF provides that adequate timelines shouldbe allowed for First Nations and Mtis to receive,

consider and respond to notifications. The

timelines, as outlined in the Consultation Matrix,

should be sufficient to review materials, assess theinformation and respond with concerns. Timelines

are also flexible depending upon information

received and capacity of First Nations and Mtis to

participate.

3. The CPF acknowledges that consultation fundingmay be required to allow the affected community

to participate in consultations and provides a

website address for First Nations and Mtis

Consultation Participation Fund information.


32/33

10

4. Consultations must be with the Mtisgovernment structures that are elected and

supported by the Mtis people. Consultation

with individual Mtis, service delivery

organizations, mayors and municipal

councils and pan-Aboriginal structures

cannot discharge the duty owed to the Mtis,

as a rights-bearing people.

5. The Mtis Nation has the responsibility toconsult with its citizens and represent its

citizens, not the Crown or industry.

6. Mtis consultation processes must provideall Mtis citizens the opportunity to

participate and be heard.

7. Ultimate decision-making with respect toconsultation and accommodation must rest

with the affected rights-bearing Mtis

community.

8. Consultation must be conducted in goodfaith.

9. Consultation will occur before decisions aremade. Rights-bearing Mtis communities

are not limited to individual villages, towns

or cities. Consultation must occur with the

potentially affected rights-bearing Mtis

community and its citizens.

4. For the purposes of the CPF, the Governmentrecognizes the Presidents of Mtis Locals or their

authorized designates as the appropriate

representatives of Mtis communities. Regional or

provincial Mtis entities may be consulted only if

the community leadership has delegated this

authority through its constitutional decision-

making process, and the consulting ministry has a

written, signed copy of the authorization.

5. The CPF outlines the roles and responsibilities ofall parties. Aboriginal rights are collective rights

held by a community of people. Consultations

must therefore be targeted to the elected leaders or

representatives of Mtis communities. It is their

responsibility to consult with their community

members, not that of Government or industry.

6. This is a matter internal to the Mtis community.As noted above, the CPF provides for consultations

with the elected leadership or representatives of

Mtis communities. The policy does not require

consultation with individual community members.

7. Under the CPF, the Government makes thedecision with respect to whether consultations are

required and the level of consultations required; in

the case of Level 5 consultations, the community to

be consulted will be provided with an opportunity

to assist in developing a consultation plan.

However, ultimate decision-making with respect to

consultation, proposed decisions and actions isretained by Government. Mtis communities do

not have a veto over these decisions.

8. See #1 in this section.

9. The CPF provides that notification must be as earlyas possible and in advance of the decision to be

made. In addition, proponents are encouraged to

engage Mtis communities early in the planning

stages of projects in order to share information and

to build relationships. The CPF does not purport to

define Mtis communities but it does indicate thatthe Presidents of Mtis Locals or their authorized

representatives are considered to be the proper

representatives of the communities.


33/33

10. The MNS has a responsibility to the Mtispeople of Saskatchewan to protect and

preserve their collective rights. Through the

policy and principles set out in this

document, the MNS does not waive the right

to pursue legal avenues in order to protect or

preserve the rights of the Mtis people of

Saskatchewan.

11. For the purposes of this policy, it is assertedthat the Crown has real knowledge of

credible Mtis rights claims throughout the

entire province.

12. The Crown must give notice that it isconsidering a development project, activity,

legislative and regulatory changes, or other

activities triggering a duty to consult. The

notice, in writing, must go to the MNS

governance entity.

13. The Crown must fully inform the Mtisabout the proposed development. The Mtis

must fully inform the Crown about the land

and resource use of the Mtis people in the

project area. Since Mtis may not havenecessary information in aggregate form or

research and study is required, funding will

be used to undertake necessary work.

14. Consultation should be conducted with theobjective of avoiding infringement on Mtis

lifestyles and traditional land uses. Where

avoidance is not possible, consultation will

be conducted with the goal of mitigating

such infringement commonly referred to as

the Crowns responsibility ofaccommodation.

10. The CPF does not deny the right of communities topursue legal challenges; however it is expected that

the processes set out in the CPF will lead to serious

discussions that will result in avoiding or

mitigating adverse impacts on Aboriginal rights

and traditional uses, with recourse to the courts

being unnecessary.

11. The Government will consult with Mtis leadershipin communities or regions where Mtis Aboriginal

rights have already been recognized, such as in

Northern Saskatchewan. Where Mtis Aboriginal

rights have not yet been recognized, the decision to

consult will be made on a case-by-case basis.

Government will take into account the strength of

the claims supporting the asserted rights and the

extent of the potential impact on the exercise of the

asserted rights.

12.Notification will be provided in writing to theMtis communities that may potentially be

adversely affected by a Government decision or

action. Notification will be as early as possible,

and in advance of the decision to be made. Notice

will be to the Mtis Local or Locals potentially

affected by the decision or to a regional or

provincial body if duly delegated by the Local/s.

13. The CPF provides that notification should provideclear, complete and understandable information in

order to inform Mtis communities about a

proposed development, where it may impact

Aboriginal rights or traditional uses. The Mtishave a reciprocal obligation to respond to the

Governments notification, making their concerns

known about adverse impacts on Aboriginal rights

and traditional uses. Where necessary, consultation

participation funding may be made available.

14. One of the objectives of the CPF is to respect andprotect Aboriginal rights and traditional uses by

ensuring, through the consultation process and

subsequent decisions, that negative impacts on

these rights and uses are avoided, minimized or

mitigated, and rights are accommodated as

appropriate. Accommodation means thatGovernment and the proponent would use their

better understanding found through consultation

with Mtis to avoid, change, or amend the plan or

action so as to minimize or avert negative impacts

on any Aboriginal right and/or traditional use.