Chiniki and Goodstoney will not join Bearspaw’s Treat 7 mass annuity lawsuit

ÎYÂRHE NAKODA – Two of three Îyârhe Nakoda First Nations say they will not join the Bearspaw First Nation’s recently launched class action against the federal government over Treaty 7 annuity payments, citing a lack of consultation and continued commitment to a negotiated solution approach.

Chiniki First Nation and Goodstoney First Nation learn about Bearspaw due process – Aims to increase the historic $5 annual income set in 1877 to fit current economic realities – at the same time as the general public.

According to interviews with Chiniki and Goodstoney officials, there was no contact or invitation to join the class action prior to Bearspaw’s announcement on November 26.

“At no time prior to Bearspaw’s press release were Chiniki or Goodstoney First Nations advised, contacted or consulted regarding the above-mentioned case,” the two countries said in a joint statement.

Both have since reiterated their intention to remain at the negotiating table and said that process began months before Bearspaw’s claim was presented.

Chiniki CEO Ryan Robb said the First Nation has been in talks with Canada about the annuity since late spring or early summer of this year.

Goodstoney CEO Dean Cherkas noted that the First Nation entered the process shortly after Chiniki.

Both leaders emphasized their countries’ preference for negotiation over litigation, citing the federal government’s efforts to address similar settlement claims at negotiating tables elsewhere in Canada.

These negotiation processes often prove more time-saving, cost-effective and collaborative than lengthy court battles, they said.

“We were already in discussions with Canada to find a more negotiated path for annuities,” Robb said. “It wouldn’t make sense for us to stray from this path and go into litigation.”

Cherkas echoed this sentiment, stating that resorting to legal action could halt or derail progress made through negotiations.

“It is more practical for us to continue our discussions at the negotiation table,” he said. “Litigation can take years and be more costly, whereas negotiations have a track record of reaching resolution faster and at lower cost.”

Bearspaw’s class action lawsuit has been filed but has not yet been approved by the courts. For the claim to proceed as a class action, other Treaty 7 Countries are often invited to join or “opt-in”. Without certification, the case is still in its infancy and its future remains uncertain.

Robb and Cherkas confirmed that as of Monday, Dec. 16, there had been no direct consultation or formal discussions between Bearspaw and the other two Îyârhe Nakoda First Nations regarding the details of the case, potential legal fees or strategies.

Cherkas added that the broader relationship between the three Îyârhe Nakoda First Nations has historically been, and continues to be, civil and professional.

“At the same time, there’s no point in looking down that path when we’ve already taken action and have retainer agreements with legal counsel, so we’re moving forward,” Cherkas said.

Bearspaw First Nation did not respond to requests for comment before press time. In previous public statements, Bearspaw Chief Darcy Dixon emphasized the importance of addressing the $5 annuity, which has not been adjusted since 1877.

“We did not prioritize having discussions that would lead to results. We are not asking for help. “The five dollar bill is not the same in 1877 as it is today,” Dixon said in a Nov. 26 interview with The Guardian. Appearance. “We ask what was promised in the treaty.

“If you look at the text of the treaty, it states that we will be treated no differently than other treaties made in Canada and given at the time.”

Bearspaw’s legal counsel argued that Canada’s failure to update the payment violated the spirit of Treaty 7 and shortchanged the treaty’s signatories, given the extensive resource development and economic activity in Treaty 7 territory over the past century.

“$5 hasn’t been raised since 1877, and back then $5 was enough to get a family through the winter. This was intentional. $5 today can’t buy you a Tim Hortons coffee and a breakfast sandwich,” said Sonny Cochrane, co-managing partner of Winnipeg-based Cochrane Sinclair Law and legal representation on the case. “The way Canada is handling this annuity payment is a really big deal It has been turned into a shell of an empty promise that was and still is an important promise,” he told Outlook in a Nov. 26 interview.

“On a scale of 1 to 10, this is an 11 in terms of exploitative actions by the Canadian government. Canada’s neglect to adjust the $5 starting in 1877 is a shame and a disgrace when you consider how many billions of dollars were taken from Treaty 7 lands. … It is aimed to correct the historical wrong that has occurred and continues to occur today.”

While Bearspaw moves forward with his legal claim, Chiniki and Goodstoney are focused on advancing their arguments at the negotiating table. They point to ongoing processes in Treaty 6 and Treaty 8 territories where First Nations are settling annuity-related claims directly with Canada rather than through the courts.

Chiniki and Goodstoney say their path is clear for now.

“We want a timely and fair decision for our members,” Robb said. “Negotiations give us a better chance at this than litigation could.”

With Bearspaw trying to rally support for a class action lawsuit and Chiniki and Goodstoney opting out, the future of Treaty 7 annuity adjustments may depend on which route offers the most practical path forward.