Articles

As the 20th anniversary of the BC treaty process nears, an inevitable costs-benefits analysis is being undertaken about the results obtained and the expenditures incurred. 

As the year 2011 comes to a close, I (like many of you, I suspect), find myself reflecting on the past year. As it relates to Aboriginal law developments, how much progress, if any, has been made over the past year?

Pamela Palmater deconstructs the government’s actions with the drafting of Bill C-3, and argues that the list of problems with the Bill outweigh any benefits, with the end result being an assault on the fundamental aspect of equality.

Brian J. Hebert describes the issues that arise with regard to the duty to consult and accommodate as a result of the Carrier Sekani decision.

David Barbaree gives a synopsis of Justice Tony North's April 28th, 2011 presentation at the OBA Conference Centre

John Edmond studies Bill S-11 dealing with Reserve water regimes. Edmond describes the Federal government’s response to Chapter 5 of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development’s 2005 report, “Drinking Water in First Nations Communities”

Peter Landman discusses the issues with regard to the Crown’s duty to consult when First Nation communities enter into Impact Benefit Agreements (IBA) with proponents.

Jonathan Charland revisits the 2007 Tsilhqot’in Nation v. British Columbia case, and argues that interpreting the test for Aboriginal title has been rendered difficult by inconsistencies in the jurisprudence.

As my first term as chair comes to an end, I cannot help but reflect on the past activities of the Aboriginal Law Section, as well as look forward to what we have in store for next term.

It has been close to a year since I returned to Ontario after completing a contract position with the B.C. Attorney General’s Aboriginal Law Group. After having spent this time working on the side of government, I am reminded once again of the necessity to take into account a balance of viewpoints.