Thank you, Mr. Chairman. When the idea of a Metis Accord was first discussed by the representatives of the Metis people, the other aboriginal organizations and the Ministers from the provinces and the federal government, it was because the Metis wanted to be included in section 91, which says basically that the federal government has the power to legislate for Metis people.
Right now the federal government has power to legislate for Indian and Inuit only, the Metis are not included. The federal government was under terrific pressure to concede that, but they made a point that, surely the provinces would have to give something too. The suggestion was the provinces should, at least, provide some assurance that lands in the provinces may be made available in the process of negotiations, to provide the possibility that Metis could establish a land base in the provinces. The federal government does not own much land in the provinces, if at all.
That was the context. As a Minister, I supported that very much, because I know the predicament of Metis people, and other aboriginal people in the provinces, we were prepared to support it, and we did. When it came to the Metis of the Northwest Territories becoming a party to it, and ourselves, again we said that was fine. We suggested that certain wording be included in the accord that would suggest that, in the Northwest Territories, it has been the tradition of the Dene and Metis for years, since about 1973, that the approach to acquiring land and resources is through a joint, comprehensive claims approach and, at least, if not that, then a joint Dene-Metis approach through the regional claims process.
That is what we said we wanted in the wording. My political assessment was that to sign a document that would say, as a government, we support the Metis having separate status in negotiations, to have a right to a separate land base, separate self-government provisions and institutions, would create a tremendous amount of political dissention, perhaps, in the Mackenzie Valley. First and foremost, no one has been given that explicit direction here, so I had raised that with the Metis leadership at the time.
Following that, the National Chief of the Dene Nation, wrote to the Metis Nation Leader, and voiced his own concerns about a couple of points. One, what does it mean in regards to rights of the Dene, in regards to their traditional lands, if Metis people suddenly acquired the right to negotiate separate land bases. The other point was, in the view of the Dene Nation, the territorial government had no business signing such a document.
My assessment at that time, and my advice to the Metis, was that the political support is there for the political accord, and to suggest that the G.N.W.T. should sign such a document, without the wording changes that we wanted, would create unnecessary political dissention in the Mackenzie Valley. It may also have caused some reason for uneasiness between the A.F.N. and the national Metis organizations, since the Dene Nation is part of the Assembly of First Nations.
In order to keep the process going, it was my view that there is no harm done, there is nothing lost with the fact that the territorial government is not a signatory of this accord. Given the current situation, as you have it in the Deh Cho and the south Slave, if you find that the call for this in the Sahtu and in the Gwich'in area is not in line with the situation there, it is because it has already been negotiated, one single land base for everybody up there. The case is not true for the Deh Cho or the south Slave, where it is possible, particularly in the south Slave, that the Dene Chiefs may want to negotiate their own land base, institutions, and self-government for themselves.
If that is the case, then certainly the issue would be whether this government would support such a thing, and of course we would, because it is clearly straightforward that the Metis should not, they are left out by the Dene leadership, without a process to negotiate their own claim, their own lands, but that is basically the suggestion. If we would have got the wording that we sought, which, in fact, was agreed to at one point, the question would not come up, except that now, probably, the Dene would be asking us why we did such a thing. Thank you.