Skip all menus (access key: 2)Skip first menu (access key: 1)Indian Claims Commission
Français
Contact Us
Search
Employment Opportunities
Site Map
Home
About the ICC
Media Room
Links
Mailing Lists
Indian Claims Commission
February 2, 2011
/Home /Publications /2008-2009 RPP
About the ICC
 src=
 src=
 src=
Media Room
 src=
 src=
 src=
Publications
General Information
Overhead Presentation
The Facts on Claims
Newsletters
First Nation Land Surrenders on the Prairies
Completed Inquiry and Mediation Reports
Key Words Index and Report Summaries
Annual Reports
ICC Proceedings
ICC Authorities
2005-2006 DPR
2006-2007 DPR
2006-2007 RPP
2007-2008 DPR
2007-2008 RPP
2008-2009 RPP
 src=
 src=
 src=
Claimsmap
 src=
 src=
 src=
Email Alerts

Printable Version Printable Version
Email This Page Email This Page

Report on Plans and Priorities – 2008-2009 Estimates

To download the 2007-2008 Estimates - PDFPDF

_____________________________________

The Honourable Chuck Strahl, M.P.

Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern
Development and Federal Interlocutor for
Métis and Non-Status Indians

Table of Contents

SECTION I - OVERVIEW
1.   Chief Commissioner's Message
2.   Management Representation Statement
3.   Raison d'être
4.   Organizational Information
Voted and Statutory Items displayed in the Main Estimates
Commission Planned Spending and Full-time Equivalents
5.   Summary Information
6.   RPP Departmental Plans and Priorities
Background
Operating Environment
Plans and Priorities
Challenges
 
SECTION II - ANALYSIS OF PROGRAM ACTIVITIES BY STRATEGIC OUTCOME
1.   Analysis by Program Activity
 
SECTION III - SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
1.   Financial Tables
Table 1:.  Commission's Links to the Government of Canada Outcomes
Table 2: Services Received Without Charge
2.   Logic Model
3.   Claims Process and Stages of Inquiry
4.   Mediation/Facilitation Process
5.   Contacts
 
SECTION IV - OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST
1.   List of All Claims Addressed by the ISCC in Inquiries and of Mediations Concluded with Reports
2.   List of Active ISCC Inquiries
3.   List of Ceased ISCC Inquiries
4.   List of Claims in Mediation/Facilitation

SECTION I - OVERVIEW

1. Chief Commissioner's Message

It is my honour to present the Indian Specific Claims Commission's (ISCC) Report on Plans and Priorities for 2008-2009.

The ISCC operates according to the following four principles: 1. Independence and Impartiality; 2. Equity and Natural Justice; 3. Openness and Transparency; and 4. Importance of Oral History. These principles guide us in developing and sustaining our relationships, as well as conducting our activities.

Since its inception in 1991, the Commission has gained credibility as an independent, neutral body that conducts inquiries into specific claims disputes between First Nations and the Government of Canada, as well as providing mediation services at any stage of the claims process to foster achievement of positive outcomes. Since that time, we have addressed 78 claims in inquiries and completed 11 mediations.

The Commission's mandate - to conduct inquiries and to provide mediation/facilitation services - is fulfilled by a part-time Chief Commissioner and part-time Commissioners, with the support of staff. Our work has been carried out in the ISCC's offices and in the field during staff visits, community sessions, oral hearings and mediation sessions anywhere in Canada. The ISCC's inquiry and mediation processes have enabled Canada and First Nations to take a fresh look at claims, and those processes offer innovative solutions to the parties in their efforts to resolve complex and contentious issues of policy and law.

In fulfilment of its mandate, the ISCC has developed a sound reputation for conducting its inquiries and providing mediation services in a balanced and neutral manner that favours neither party in the process. The Commission has played a unique role in Canada, working between parties with opposing viewpoints. As Chief Commissioner, I actively support approaches to the issues and concerns of the parties that foster the greatest degree of impartiality and independence so that the credibility and acceptance of our work and findings are beyond reproach.

We at the Commission see our role as bridging different perspectives. Despite all of our best efforts, different perspectives will continue to characterize the specific claims process in Canada for some time. This concept of bridging will remain critical if we are to make collective progress in the specific claims area.

Since 1994, the Commission has called upon the federal government to create an independent, permanent body to expedite the resolution of First Nation specific claims. We are pleased to note that there are changes on the horizon, with the tabling of Bill C-30, the Specific Claims Tribunal Act, in the House of Commons on November 27, 2007. The Act would see the creation of a Specific Claims Tribunal that would have decision making powers - a key ISCC recommendation for many years. As well, the Government has indicated its intent to set up a mediation body.

The ISCC's mandate was amended by Order in Council P.C. 2007-1789. As well as fixing a March 31, 2009, closing date for the ISCC, the Order in Council directed the Commission to cease work on inquiries which had not yet reached the community session phase of the ISCC inquiry process, and stop accepting new claims for inquiry. In addition, if a First Nation requests that the Commission cease its inquiry, it must do so immediately without issuing a final report. The Commission must complete and report on all the inquiries which have reached the community session phase by December 31, 2008, and cease all its activities, including those related to mediation, by March 31, 2009.

This then will be the Indian Specific Claims Commission's last Report on Plans and Priorities.

As the Commission's work wraps up, our focus over the next year will be on completing the inquiries and mediations still under way, and ensuring that the knowledge and experience acquired during our 17 years of operation are not lost. One of my priorities over the next year will be to attempt to secure new employment for the ISCC's personnel, who have worked diligently with Commissioners to bring fairness to the specific claims process. I would like to reassure First Nations and Government that the quality of our work will be maintained throughout this challenging period, and that we are determined to preserve the Commission's legacy by all means possible including careful archiving of records for future consultation by First Nations, Government, specific claim researchers and the general public.

The Commissioners and staff will continue to work diligently to complete our work within the time period allotted, effectively fulfilling the Commission's mandate. As always, our experience from 17 years of operation is available to First Nations and Government. We stand ready to assist in any way in the creation of a lasting solution to the delays and backlog in the specific claims process.

Renée Dupuis, C.M. Ad.E.

Chief Commissioner

2. Management Representation Statement

I submit for tabling in Parliament, the 2008-2009 Report on Plans and Priorities (RPP) for the Indian Specific Claims Commission.

This document has been prepared based on the reporting principles contained in Guide for the Preparation of Part III of the 2008-2009 Estimates: Reports on Plans and Priorities and Departmental Performance Reports:

  • It adheres to the specific reporting requirements outlined in the TBS guidance;
  • It is based on the Commission's strategic outcome and Program Activity Architecture that was approved by the Treasury Board;
  • It presents consistent, comprehensive, balanced and reliable information;
  • It provides a basis of accountability for the results achieved with the resources and authorities entrusted to it; and
  • It reports finances based on approved planned spending numbers from the Treasury Board Secretariat.

____________________________________________________________________

Diana Monnet

Executive Director

Indian Specific Claims Commission

3. Raison d'être

The mission of the Indian Specific Claims Commission is to assist First Nations and Canada to resolve specific claims in the context of the Specific Claims Policy. The Commission operates at arms-length of the government and First Nations. It is a commission of inquiry offering to a First Nation, at its request, an independent and neutral process - other than litigation - to inquire into specific claims that have been examined and rejected by the Minister of DIAND or when the First Nation disputes the compensation criteria the government proposes to use in negotiating the settlement of its claim. At any stage of the specific claims process, the Commission can provide for mediation or facilitation services to assist the parties in reaching a satisfactory resolution when requested by both the First Nation and Canada. The Commission may also prepare reports from time to time that the Commissioners consider are required in respect of the Commission's activities and the activities of the Government of Canada and the Indian band(s) relating to specific claims.

Depending on the exact nature of the Indian specific claim, the fair resolution of the claim can provide a range of benefits including:

  • better legal risk management;
  • enhanced safety and security of people and property;
  • closure for the First Nation of their historic grievance;
  • greater certainty over lands and resources;
  • enhanced socio-economic opportunities for First Nations and their neighbours;
  • improved relationships between First Nations, governments and communities;
  • enhanced international respect for Canada's treatment of its Aboriginal peoples
  • improved knowledge and understanding by the public of historical claims.

4. Organizational Information

The ISCC is currently comprised of a part-time Chief Commissioner and four part-time Commissioners. The Commissioners are supported by Commission staff, headed by an Executive Director. The Management Committee includes the Executive Director, Commission Counsel, Director of Liaison, Director of Mediation, and Director of Corporate Services.


Voted and Statutory Items displayed in the Main Estimates

Vote or
Statutory Item

Truncated Vote or Statutory Wording

2008-09
Main Estimates
($ thousands)

2007-08
Main Estimates
($ thousands)

50

Program expenditures

3,867

6,136

(S)

Contributions to employee benefit plans

362

597

 

Total Commission

4,229

6,733

The expenditure reduction of $2.5M from the Main Estimates was attributed given the anticipated conclusion of operations of the Commission on December 31, 2008.

Commission Planned Spending and Full-time Equivalents



($ thousands)

Forecast Spending
2007-08

Planned Spending
2008-09

Planned Spending
2009-10

Planned Spending
2010-11

     

Conduct inquiries and provide mediation services

6,733

4,229

--

--

Total Main Estimates

6,733

4,229

--

--

Adjustments:

Supplementary Estimates

 

 

 

 

Operating budget carry forward

252

--

--

--

Treasury Board Vote 15

 

 

 

 

Salary increases resulting from collective bargaining agreements

67

--

--

--

Treasury Board Vote 23

 

 

 

 

Funding eligible paylist expenditures

21

--

 

 

Total Adjustments

340

 

--

--

Total Planned Spending

7,073

4,229

--

--

Plus: Cost of services received without charge

613

165

--

--

Total Commission Spending

7,686

4,394

--

--

Full-time Equivalents

43

37

--

--

The ISCC does not operate any transfer payment grant and contribution programs. All of the ISCC's funds are used to meet its operating costs. Slightly more than three-quarters of the budget is used to meet the costs of salaries, benefits and professional and special services. The balance of the budget is used to meet the costs of transportation to hold inquiries and mediation in First Nation communities, financial and administrative services, accommodation, and office equipment and supplies. This spending is intended to support the work of the Commissioners and staff concerning the 10 inquiries which had reached the ISCC's community session phase when the Commission's mandate was amended in November 2007, and the 27 mediations currently before the ISCC.

5. Summary Information

Financial Resources

($ thousands)

2008-09

2009-10

2010-11

$4,229

--

--

Human Resources

2008-09

2009-10

2010-11

37 FTEs

--

--

Departmental Priorities

Name

Type

1. Conduct fair and impartial inquiries.

Ongoing

2. Provide mediation services at any stage of a claim.

Ongoing

 Program Activities by Strategic Outcome 

 

 

Planned Spending

($ thousands)

Expected Results

2008-09

2009-10

2010-11

Strategic Outcome:Fair resolution of Indian specific claims

Conduct inquiries and provide mediation services

Inquiries completed and mediation services provided to First Nations and Government

4,229

----

--

6. RPP −Departmental Plans and Priorities

Background

In 1991, following the Oka crisis of 1990, the federal government created the Indian

Specific Claims Commission pursuant to the Inquiries Act. This statute permits the Governor in Council to approve an Order in Council that establishes independent commissions to conduct inquiries on matters associated with good government. The Order in Council for the establishment of the Indian Specific Claims Commission (the Commission) designated the Prime Minister as the appropriate Minister for purposes of the Financial Administration Act.

In July 2004, the Governor in Council approved an Order in Council designating the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development (DIAND) as the appropriate Minister for purposes of the Financial Administration Act. It should be noted, however, that the Commission continues to operate at an arms-length basis, independent of government, while reporting on its activities in an annual report to the Governor in Council, as well as to Parliament and in its Report on Plans and Priorities and the Commission's Performance Report. The Commission also provides information to the public concerning its activities and results, issues special reports, and from time to time is called upon to conduct speaking engagements.

To maintain its arms-length relationship from the Minister of DIAND, the Commission has entered into an agreement with the Canadian Human Rights Commission for the provision of corporate services.

In November 2007, the Indian Claims Commission's mandate was amended by Order in Council P.C. 2007-1789. As a result, the Commission can no longer accept new claims for inquiry and must cease its activities on inquiries which have yet not reached the community session phase. In addition, if a First Nation requests that the Commission cease its inquiry, it must do so immediately without issuing a final inquiry report. By December 31, 2008, the Commission must complete and report on all the inquiries which had reached the community session phase by November 2007. All its activities, including those related to mediation, must cease by March 31, 2009.

Operating Environment 

The Commission operates at arms-length and is independent from government. It is a commission of inquiry offering to First Nations a process, other than litigation, to inquire into specific claims that have been examined and rejected by the Minister of DIAND, or when the First Nation disputes the compensation criteria established by the Minister for that particular claim.

When a First Nation has researched its specific claim and submitted it to the Minister of DIAND together with any supporting documentation, DIAND's Specific Claims Branch performs its own research and, with the involvement of the federal Department of Justice, determines if the claim establishes an outstanding lawful obligation on the part of the government. If the federal government does not believe it has an outstanding lawful obligation, the First Nation's claim is denied and the Minister of DIAND informs the First Nation that it will not negotiate a settlement. Until the Indian Specific Claims Commission's mandate was amended by Order in Council P.C. 2007-1789 in November 2007, the First Nation had two options: it could seek a remedy from the appropriate court, or it could request the Commission to conduct an inquiry. This latter option is no longer available to a First Nation with a rejected specific claim since the ISCC can no longer accept new requests for inquiry.

It is important to note that the Commission does not operate as a court and is not, therefore, bound by the strict rules of evidence, the limitation periods in which claims can be brought nor other technical defences that might present obstacles to resolving the First Nation's claim against the Crown. This flexibility enhances the Commission's ability to conduct its inquiries in a fair and impartial manner in order to expedite the process of making recommendations to the Minister of DIAND regarding a First Nation's specific claim, or objection to the compensation criteria. This process fosters the development and implementation of innovative solutions that can resolve complex and contentious issues of policy and law related to Indian specific claims.

Currently the Commission is conducting 10 inquiries and supporting 27 mediation or facilitation cases, as well as meeting information requests from the public and First Nations. Following the tabling of Bill C-30, the Specific Claims Tribunal Act and amendments to the ISCC's mandate in November 2007, work on 24 claims which were within the ISCC's inquiry process ceased. The First Nations affected have been notified. With respect to the future workload, the Commission must complete all its inquiries, including the issuing of reports, by December 31, 2008, and cease all its activities, including those related to mediation, by March 31, 2009. In addition, a final annual report must be submitted by March 31, 2009.

Plans and Priorities

The ISCC has one strategic outcome: Fair resolution of Indian specific claims.

The first priority of conducting fair and impartial inquiries supports this strategic outcome by providing First Nations with a neutral and objective mechanism for reviewing the decision of the Minister of DIAND rejecting their claim, or the compensation criteria being proposed to resolve the claim.

At the request of a First Nation when their specific claim has been denied by the Minister of DIAND or the First Nation disputes the compensation criteria the government proposes to use in negotiating settlement of the claim, the Commission: conducts an inquiry; identifies the issues; hears and assess the evidence, testimony and submissions; deliberates; and prepares and issues a report of its findings and recommendations. Currently, there are 10 claims within the ISCC's inquiry process.

The second priority of providing mediation services at any stage of the claim process supports the Commission's strategic outcome by providing the First Nation and Canada, at the request of either party and on consent of both parties, with mediation services that help the parties to reach agreement on issues and possible solutions. Currently, there are 27 active mediation cases.

Together with the mediator or facilitator, the parties decide how the negotiation process will be conducted. This approach ensures that the unique circumstances of each particular negotiation reflect the views of both parties. Mediation or facilitation services can be provided at any stage of the specific claims process.

Challenges

The Commission faces a number of key challenges as it winds down its operations. These include: maintaining the excellence of its operations; documenting the knowledge gained from experience to preserve valuable information and encouraging further research in the area; completing all its inquiry activities by December 2008, and all its mediation and facilitation activities by March 2009 within finite fiscal limits; and expanding the awareness of the public about Indian specific claims in general and the progress being made towards resolving them.

SECTION II - ANALYSIS OF PROGRAM ACTIVITIES BY STRATEGIC OUTCOME

1. Analysis by Program Activity

In the summer of 2006, the ISCC presented its Program Activity Architecture submission to Treasury Board. The following information was approved by Treasury Board.

Strategic Outcome:

Fair resolution of Indian specific claims

Program Activity Name:

Conduct inquiries and provide mediation services

Financial Resources:

($ thousands)

2008-09

2009-10

2010-11

$4,229

--

--

 Human Resources:

2008-09

2009-10

2010-11

37

--

--

The ISCC conducts impartial inquiries when a First Nation disputes rejection of their specific claim by the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, or when a First Nation disagrees with the compensation criteria prescribed by the Government in negotiating a settlement of their claim.

As well as conducting formal inquiries, the ISCC can, at the request of either party and with consent of both the Government and the First Nation(s), provide or arrange for such mediation services at any stage in the claims process that the ISCC believes may assist the parties in reaching an agreement in respect of any matter relating to an Indian specific claim.

This activity results in inquiries being held and reports written containing findings and recommendations to the Minister of Indian Affairs. Mediation results in better understanding between the parties, leading to agreement on the issues and development of innovative solutions that support efforts to resolve the Indian specific claim.

The key performance measure for these results is the number of inquiries and mediations accepted and undertaken by the Commission, and the number of reports written and distributed. The intended strategic outcome of these reports is a fair resolution of the Indian specific claim.

SECTION III - SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

1. Financial Tables

Table 1: Commission's Links to the Government of Canada Outcomes

Fair resolution of Indian specific claims

 

Expected
Results

Planned Spending

Alignment to Government of Canada Outcome Area

2008-09

2009-10

2010-11

Conduct inquiries and provide mediation services

Ongoing

4,229

--

--

The Commission's strategic outcome contributes to all of the Government of Canada outcomes. In this regard, resolution of Indian specific claims often provides greater certainty over lands and resources, enhancing economic opportunities for First Nations, and contributing to strong economic growth. Resolution of Indian specific claims can result in improved relations between governments, First Nations and their neighbouring communities, fostering safer and more secure communities. Improved relations also support Canada's efforts to achieve a strong and mutually beneficial North American partnership.

Table 2: Services Received Without Charge

($ thousands)

2008-09

Accommodation provided by Public Works and Government Services Canada

--

Contributions covering employer's share of employees'insurance premiums and expenditures paid by Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat

165

Total 2008-09 Services Received Without Charge

165

2. Logic Model

To depict the relationships between the program inputs, results and outcomes, the following vertically aligned presentation displays the logic of the program design for the ISCC's strategic outcome of "Fair resolution of Indian specific claims." Accountability for the activities, results and outcomes resides with the Chief Commissioner.

Planned Outcomes

Intermediate:   The Commission will cease its activities by March 31, 2009.

Immediate:   Enhanced relationship between First Nations and Government. Inquiries, including reports, will be terminated by December 31, 2008. The Commission will cease to exist by March 31, 2009.

Results

Reports of inquiry and of mediation and other related reports; mediated or facilitated specific claims settlement agreements; improved public understanding of specific claims.

Activities

Inquiries: research and document; receive and exchange information; conduct inquiries; deliberate, prepare and issue reports.

Mediation: develop negotiation plans; facilitate meetings and communications; help define the issues; develop and propose innovative solutions to resolve the issues; and foster harmonious relationships between the parties.

Public information: issue reports; maintain website.

3. Claims Process and Stages of Inquiry

As directed by Order in Council P.C. 2007-1789, the Commission is no longer accepting new claims for inquiry and has ceased all its activities on inquiries not yet at the community session stage. Work has ceased on inquiries which had not reached the community session stage on November 27, 2007, when Bill C-30, the Specific Claims Tribunal Act, was tabled. First Nations have been notified of the cessation of the ISCC's inquiry.

The Commission operates at arms-length and is independent from government. It is a commission of inquiry offering to First Nations a process, other than litigation, to inquire into specific claims that have been examined and rejected by the Minister of DIAND, or when the First Nation disputes the compensation criteria established by the Minister for that particular claim.

In this regard, it is important to note that the Commission does not operate as a court and is not, therefore, bound by the strict rules of evidence, the limitation periods in which claims can be brought nor other technical defences that might present obstacles to resolving the First Nation's claim against the Crown. This flexibility enhances the Commission's ability to conduct its inquiries in a fair and impartial manner in order to expedite the process of making recommendations to the Minister of DIAND regarding a First Nation's specific claim or objection to the compensation criteria. This process fosters the development and implementation of innovative solutions that can resolve complex and contentious issues of policy and law related to Indian specific claims.

A specific claim starts with a First Nation that has researched its claim and submitted it to the Minister of DIAND together with any supporting documentation. DIAND'S Specific Claims Branch performs its own research and, with the involvement of the Department of Justice, assesses the merits of the claim to determine if the claim establishes an outstanding lawful obligation on the part of the government, as defined in the Specific Claims Policy. If the federal government does not believe it has an outstanding lawful obligation, the First Nation's claim is denied and the Minister of DIAND informs the First Nation that it will not negotiate settlement of the claim. Until the Indian Specific Claims Commission's mandate was amended by Order in Council P.C. 2007-1789 in November 2007, the First Nation had two options: it could seek a remedy from the appropriate court, or it could request the Commission to conduct an inquiry. This latter option is no longer available to a First Nation with a rejected specific claim since the ISCC can no longer accept new requests for inquiry.

There are five stages to the Commission's inquiry process:

  1. Initial Request for Inquiry - The Commission reviews the First Nation's request for an independent inquiry and, if it agrees to accept the specific claim for review and assessment, a panel of three Commissioners is formed to hear the inquiry. (Activity now ceased)
  2. Preparation for Inquiry - Briefing material is prepared and sent to all of the parties in advance to facilitate discussion. Counsel for both parties are asked to state the issues to be addressed by the inquiry, from which the Commission staff will attempt, in consultation with counsel for the parties, to generate a single list of issues. A planning conference is held among the parties and their counsel. In many instances, the need for further research is identified. If there is no consensus by the parties on a single list of issues, this matter is placed before the panel for decision. (Activity now ceased)
  3. Staff Visit and Community Session(s) - Commissioners and staff attend a session or series of sessions in the First Nation's community to hear directly from Elders and other knowledgeable members of the First Nation. In some instances, expert witnesses may be called upon to present evidence or testimony and are subject to cross examination by the other party. (Activity now ceased)
  4. Written and Oral Submissions - Both parties present submissions to the panel.
  5. Commissioners'Final Report- The panel of Commissioners consider the evidence, testimony and submissions presented to them and issue a final report that contains their findings and recommendation that the Minister of DIAND not reconsider the decision to deny the specific claim, or that the Minister of DIAND accept the specific claim for negotiation.

The Commission's terms of reference also permit it to prepare reports, from time to time, that the Commissioners consider are required in respect of the Commission's activities and the activities of the Government of Canada and the Indian band(s) relating to specific claims.

4. Mediation/Facilitation Process

As directed by Order in Council P.C. 2007-1789, the Commission must cease all its activities, including those related to mediation, by March 31, 2009.

At the request of either Canada or the First Nation and with the consent of both, the Commission can provide or arrange for mediation assistance at any stage of the claims process. Depending on the nature of the claim, the Commission offers a broad range of alternative dispute resolution services tailored to suit the particular needs of the parties. The Indian Specific Claims Commission provides facilitative mediation services that are culturally sensitive, informal, non-threatening, and flexible. Together with the mediator, the parties decide how the mediation process will be conducted.

There are four steps in the Commission's mediation process:

  1. Preparation for Mediation - The Commission reviews the claim being negotiated and brings representatives of the negotiating parties together face-to-face to discuss the issues and terms of the negotiation and mediation protocol agreements.
  2. Negotiation Process - The Commission facilitates discussions on compensation, assists the parties by coordinating the gathering of information including land appraisals and joint loss of use studies, and monitors the parties'decisions and undertakings.
  3. Settlement - When and after the negotiating parties reach an agreement in principle, lawyers for the First Nation and Canada work together to draft a final settlement agreement which is initialled by the negotiators and ratified by both parties.
  4. Final Mediation Report - The Commission reports to the federal government, the First Nation and the public on its contribution to the outcome of the negotiation.

5. Contacts

Indian Specific Claims Commission

P.O. Box 1750, Station B

Ottawa, Ontario

K1P 1A2

Telephone: 613-943-2737

Facsimile: 613-943-0157

T.T.Y: 613-943-3772

Internet:

E-mail: feedback@indianclaims.ca

SECTION IV - OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST

1. List of All Claims Addressed by the ISCC in Inquiries and of Mediations Concluded with Reports

This table updates readers on the status of claims for which the Indian Specific Claims Commission has completed its inquiry or mediation activities. For all the claims listed below, an inquiry or mediation report has been published and is available at /publications/claimsreportsen.asp.

The table tracks the progress of each claim through the specific claims process once the ISCC has completed its inquiry or mediation/facilitation services.

The first column lists the name of the First Nation and the type or title of the specific claim it brought to the ISCC for inquiry or mediation/facilitation. This information is followed by the outcome of the ISCC's inquiry or its mediation activities. The next column contains the date of the ISCC's report, which is followed by a column containing the date of Canada's response to ISCC's recommendation(s). The nature of that response and any settlement information available are also found in the last column.

Name of First Nation, Province

Type or title of claim

Outcome

Date and Type of ISCC Report

Canada's Response

1 Alexis, AB

TransAlta Utilities rights of way

ISCC recommendation to negotiate rejected by INAC

Inquiry

March

2003

In July 2005, government rejected recommendations, stating that a lump sum payment was adequate compensation, that there was no duty to advise the First Nation respecting its taxation powers, and that informed consent to the expropriation was not required.

2 Athabasca Chipewyan, AB

W.A.C. Bennett Dam and damage to IR 201

ISCC recommendation to negotiate rejected by INAC

Inquiry

March

1998

In April 2001, government rejected recommendation, disagreeing that it had a fiduciary duty or a duty under Treaty 8 to protect reserve from effects of Bennett Dam caused by BC Hydro, a third party, or to invoke Navigable Waters Protection Act respecting the dam.

3 Athabasca Denesuline, SK

Treaty harvesting rights

ISCC recommendation to negotiate outside specific claims process rejected by INAC.

1995 supplementary report noted failure of negotiations; recommended government recognize treaty rights or provide litigation funding.

Inquiry

December

1993

Supplementary report

November

1995

In August 1994, government rejected recommendations made in December 1993 report.

November 1995 supplementary report acknowledged; no further response.

4 Betsiamites Band, QC

Highway 138

Accepted for negotiation without full inquiry

Inquiry

March

2005

In January 2004, government accepted claim for negotiation while inquiry underway.

5 Betsiamites Band, QC

RiviPre Betsiamites Bridge

Accepted for negotiation without full inquiry

Inquiry

March

2005

In January 2004, government accepted claim for negotiation while inquiry underway.

6 Bigstone Cree Nation, AB

Treaty land entitlement

Accepted for negotiation without full inquiry

Inquiry

March

2000

In October 1998, government accepted claim for negotiation while inquiry underway.

7 Blood Tribe/Kainaiwa, AB

1889 Akers surrender

Accepted for negotiation without full inquiry

Inquiry

June

1999

In April 1998, government accepted claim for negotiation while inquiry underway.

8 Blood Tribe/Kainaiwa, AB

Akers surrender

Settled with assistance of Commission

Mediation

August

2005

In September 2003, claim settled for $3.55 million in compensation.

9 Blood Tribe/Kainaiwa, AB

Big Claim

Recommended claim respecting southern boundary be accepted for negotiation and that position on TLE claim be re-evaluated

Inquiry

March

2007

Outcome as yet unknown.

10 Blueberry River and Doig River, BC

Highway right of way IR 172

Accepted for negotiation without full inquiry

Inquiry

March

2006

In September 2004, government accepted claim for negotiation while inquiry underway.

11 Buffalo River, SK

Primrose Lake Air Weapons Range II - loss of commercial and treaty harvesting rights

ISCC recommendation that part of claim be accepted for negotiation rejected by INAC

Inquiry

September

1995

In March 2002, government rejected recommendations, stating: "[C]ompensation for commercial harvesting rights was not based on either Indian status or membership in an Indian Band; rather, it was to be paid to anyone who held a licence on the land which became the Primrose Lake Air Weapons Range."

12 Canoe Lake, SK

Primrose Lake Air Weapons Range - breach of treaty and fiduciary obligations

ISCC recommendation to negotiate accepted by INAC

Inquiry

August

1993

In June 1997, claim settled for $13,412,333 in federal compensation and a requirement that the First Nation purchase between 2,786 hectares and 20,224 hectares of land.

13 Canupawakpa Dakota, MB

Turtle Mountain surrender

Recommended claim not be accepted, but recommended Canada and the First Nation work together to acquire and properly designate the burial sites

Inquiry

July

2003

Report acknowledged October 2003.

14 Carry the Kettle, SK

Cypress Hills

Recommended claim not be accepted, but, pursuant to supplementary mandate, recommended government recognize the Carry the Kettle First Nation's historical connection to the Cypress Hills and restore to the Assiniboine people their connection to the territory

Inquiry

July

2000

Rejected in January 2001.

Government agreed with the Commission's conclusion that the claim did not disclose a lawful obligation on the part of the government under the Specific Claims Policy. The government rejected the Commission's recommendation to restore to the Assiniboine people their connection to the territory.

15 Chippewa Tri-Council, ON

Coldwater-Narrows reservation surrender

Accepted for negotiation without full inquiry

Inquiry

March

2003

In July 2002, government accepted claim for negotiation while inquiry underway.

16 Chippewa Tri-Council, ON

Collins Treaty

Accepted for negotiation without full inquiry

Inquiry

March

1998

In December 1998, claim settled for $565,000 in federal compensation.

17 Chippewas of Kettle and Stony Point, ON

1927 surrender

Recommended claim be accepted for negotiation, finding fiduciary duty to have been breached

Inquiry

March

1997

No response yet received from government.

In 1998, the Supreme Court of Canada affirmed the judgment of the Ontario Court of Appeal finding the surrender valid. The courts expressly did not deal with the fiduciary issue.

18 Chippewas of the Thames, ON

Clench defalcation

Accepted for negotiation without full inquiry

Inquiry

March

2002

In June 2001, government accepted claim for negotiation while inquiry underway.

19 Chippewas of the Thames, ON

Clench defalcation

Settled with assistance of Commission

Mediation

August

2005

In November 2004, claim settled for $15 million in federal compensation.

20 Chippewas of the Thames, ON

Muncey land inquiry

Accepted for negotiation without full inquiry

Inquiry

December

1994

In January 1995, claim settled for $5,406,905 in federal compensation.

21 Cold Lake, AB

Primrose Lake Air Weapons Range - breach of treaty and fiduciary obligations

ISCC recommendation to negotiate accepted by INAC

Inquiry

August

1993

In March 2002, claim settled for $25.5 million in federal compensation.

22 Cowessess, SK

1907 surrender - Phase I

ISCC recommendation that the portion of IR 73 surrendered in 1907 be accepted for negotiation rejected by INAC

Inquiry

March

2001

In March 2002, government rejected recommendation, disagreeing with finding of number of voters present and with interpretation of "majority," but proceeded to phase II of this inquiry as previously agreed.

23 Cowessess, SK

1907 surrender - Phase II

Majority recommended that claim not be accepted for negotiation; minority found a fiduciary breach and recommended that claim be accepted

Inquiry

July

2006

Outcome as yet unknown.

24 Cowessess, SK

QVIDA flooding claim

ISCC recommendation to negotiate accepted by INAC

Inquiry

February

1998

In December 1998, government accepted claim for negotiation.

25 Cumberland House, SK

IR 100A

Recommended that the claim regarding IR 100A be accepted for negotiation

Inquiry

March

2005

Outcome as yet unknown.

26 Duncan's, AB

1928 surrender

Majority of claim not recommended for negotiation; however, recommended that the surrender of IR 151E be accepted for negotiation

Inquiry

September

1999

In June 2001, government rejected recommendation regarding IR 151E made in September 1999 report, stating: "[T]he Commission did not examine the terms of the proposed lease and, as a result, made no finding that the 1923 lease proposal was either more or less advantageous to the First Nation than a surrender."

27 Eel River Bar, NB

Eel River Dam

Recommended claim not be accepted for negotiation

Inquiry

December

1997

Outcome as yet unknown.

28 Esketemc, BC

IR 15, 17, and 18

ISCC recommendation that the disallowance or reduction of IR 15, 17, and 18 be accepted for negotiation, rejected by INAC

Inquiry

November

2001

In June 2005, government rejected recommendation, stating that Canada had no obligation or power to create reserves for the First Nation, and that the Commission's conclusions "are largely premised on findings ... that the First Nation had aboriginal rights and title to the land at issue."

29 Fishing Lake, SK

1907 surrender

Accepted for negotiation without full inquiry

Inquiry

March

1997

In August 1996, government accepted claim for negotiation while inquiry underway.

30 Fishing Lake, SK

1907 surrender

Settled with assistance of Commission

Mediation

March

2002

In August 2001, claim settled for $34.5 million in federal compensation.

31 Flying Dust, SK

Primrose Lake Air Weapons Range II - loss of commercial and treaty harvesting rights

ISCC recommendation that part of claim be accepted for negotiations, rejected by INAC

Inquiry

September

1995

In March 2002, government rejected recommendations made in September 1995 report, stating: "[C]ompensation for commercial harvesting rights was not based on either Indian status or membership in an Indian Band; rather, it was to be paid to anyone who held a licence on the land which became the Primrose Lake Air Weapons Range."

32 Fort McKay, AB

Treaty land entitlement

ISCC recommendation that government owed outstanding entitlement of 3,815 acres to First Nation, accepted by INAC

Inquiry

December

1995

In April 1998, government accepted claim for negotiation.

33 Friends of the Michel Society, AB

1958 enfranchisement

No lawful obligation found, but recommended that government grant special standing to submit specific claims

Inquiry

March

1998

In October 2002, government "declined to accept the ISCC's recommendation to grant the Friends of the Michel Society special standing to advance specific claims."

34 Gamblers, MB

Treaty land entitlement

ISCC recommendation that outstanding treaty land entitlement, if any, should be based on 1877 date of first survey and that claim not be negotiated, accepted by INAC

Inquiry

October

1998

In November 1998, government accepted recommendation.

35 Homalco, BC

Aupe IR 6 and 6A - statutory or fiduciary obligation to obtain 80 acres of land from province of BC

ISCC recommendation to negotiate part of claim, re: 10 acres, rejected by INAC

Inquiry

December

1995

In December 1997, government rejected recommendation, stating that, as the lands were not alleged to be reserve lands, the Policy does not apply, and that Canada does not "recognize a general duty to protect traditional Indian lands (as distinct from reserve lands) from the actions of others."

36 James Smith, SK

IR 100A

Recommended that the lawful obligations that arise from Canada's dispositions of IR 100A be accepted for negotiation

Inquiry

March

2005

Outcome as yet unknown.

37 James Smith, SK

Chakastaypasin IR 98

Recommended claim be accepted for negotiation

Inquiry

March

2005

Outcome as yet unknown.

38 James Smith, SK

Treaty land entitlement

Recommended claim not be accepted for negotiation

Inquiry

February

2007

Outcome as yet unknown.

39 Joseph Bighead, SK

Primrose Lake Air Weapons Range II - loss of commercial and treaty harvesting rights

Recommended claim not be accepted for negotiation

Inquiry

September

1995

Outcome as yet unknown.

40 Kahkewistahaw, SK

Treaty land entitlement

Recommended claim not be accepted for negotiation

Inquiry

November

1996

Outcome as yet unknown.

41 Kahkewistahaw, SK

1907 reserve land surrender

Recommended claim be accepted for negotiation

Inquiry

February

1997

In December 1997, government accepted claim for negotiation.

42 Kahkewistahaw, SK

1907 surrender

Settled with assistance of Commission

Mediation February

2003

In November 2002, claim settled for $94.65 million in federal compensation.

43 Kawacatoose, SK

Treaty land entitlement

ISCC recommendation that government owed a shortfall of 8,576 acres to Band, subject to confirming research, accepted by INAC

Inquiry

March

1996

In October 2000, claim settled for $23 million in federal compensation.

44 The Key, SK

1909 surrender

Recommended claim not be accepted for negotiation

Inquiry

March

2000

Outcome as yet unknown.

45 Keeseekoowenin, MB

1906 land claim

Settled with assistance of Commission

Mediation

August

2005

In March 2005, claim settled for $6,999,900 in compensation.

46 Kluane, YK

Kluane Game Sanctuary and Kluane National Park Reserve creation

Claim resolved by agreement related to comprehensive claim settlement

Inquiry

February

2007

No substantive response from government required.

47 Lac La Ronge, SK

Treaty land entitlement

Recommended that treaty land entitlement obligation was satisfied, and that any claim to be made on restitutionary or fiduciary grounds should be subject of a separate inquiry

Inquiry

March

1996

Recommended that treaty land entitlement obligation was satisfied, and that any claim to be made on restitutionary or fiduciary grounds should be subject of a separate inquiry.

48 Lax Kw'alaams, BC

Demand for absolute surrender as precondition to settlement

ISCC recommendation that Aboriginal interests be excluded from the surrender that was to be a condition of the claim settlement, rejected by INAC

Inquiry

June

1994

In December 2001, government rejected recommendations on ground that, as Aboriginal interests were included in appraisals considered in negotiations, they cannot be excluded from settlement discussions; their inclusion is also required to achieve certainty. However, Canada hopes "to move toward settlement" based on "a revised mandate."

49 Long Plain, MB

Loss of use of treaty entitlement land

ISCC recommendation to negotiate accepted by INAC

Inquiry

February

2000

In November 2005, government accepted claim for negotiation.

50 Lucky Man, SK

Treaty land entitlement

ISCC recommendation for further research to establish proper TLE population, accepted by INAC

Inquiry

March

1997

In May 1997, government accepted recommendation: government research indicated no TLE shortfall; First Nation is reviewing and conducting its own research.

51 Mamaleleqala Qwe'Qwa'Sot'Enox, BC McKenna-McBride applications

ISCC recommendation to negotiate rejected by INAC

Inquiry

March

1997

In December 1999, government rejected recommendations, disagreeing with the interpretation of "lawful obligation" in Outstanding Business, and asserting that no fiduciary obligation can exist "in relation to Aboriginal interests in non-reserve lands."

52 Micmacs of Gesgapegiag, QC

Pre-Confederation claim to 500-acre island

No substantive recommendations made because government agreed to reconsider merits of claim

Inquiry

December

1994

In March 1995, government acknowledged receipt of report and advised claim was in abeyance pending outcome of related court case.

53 Mikisew Cree, AB

Economic benefits under Treaty 8

Accepted for negotiation without full inquiry

Inquiry

March

1997

In December 1996, government accepted claim for negotiation while inquiry underway.

54 Mississaugas of the New Credit, ON

Toronto Purchase

Accepted for negotiation without full inquiry

Inquiry

June

2003

In July 2002, government accepted claim for negotiation while inquiry underway.

55 Mistawasis, SK

1911, 1917, and 1919 surrenders

Accepted for negotiation without full inquiry

Inquiry

March

2002

In September 2001, claim settled for $16.3 million in federal compensation.

56 Moose Deer Point, ON

Pottawatomi rights

ISCC recommendation for additional research rejected by INAC

Inquiry

March

1999

In March 2001, government rejected recommendations, stating that the claim submission had already been "fully researched."

57 Moosomin, SK

1909 reserve land surrender

ISCC recommendation to negotiate accepted by INAC

Inquiry

March

1997

In December 1997, government accepted claim for negotiation.

58 Moosomin, SK

1909 reserve land surrender

Settled with assistance of Commission

Mediation

March

2004

In September 2003, claim settled for $41 million in federal compensation.

59 Muscowpetung, SK

QVIDA flooding claim

ISCC recommendation to negotiate accepted by INAC

Inquiry

February

1998

In December 1998, government accepted claim for negotiation.

60 Nak'azdli, BC

Aht-Len-Jees IR 5

Accepted for negotiation without full inquiry

Inquiry

March

1996

In January 1996, government accepted claim for negotiation while inquiry underway.

61 'Namgis, BC

Cormorant Island

ISCC recommendation to negotiate rejected by INAC

Inquiry

March

1996

In May 2001, government rejected recommendation, disagreeing that any fiduciary obligation arose on the facts of this claim.

62 'Namgis, BC

McKenna-McBride applications

ISCC recommendation to negotiate part of claim rejected by INAC

Inquiry

February

1997

In December 1999, government rejected recommendation, disagreeing with the interpretation of "lawful obligation" in Outstanding Business and disagreeing that any fiduciary obligation arose on the facts of this claim.

63 Nekaneet, SK

Agricultural and other benefits under Treaty 4

Accepted for negotiation without full inquiry

Inquiry

March

1999

In October 1998, government accepted claim for negotiation while inquiry underway.

64 Ochapowace, SK

QVIDA flooding claim

ISCC recommendation to negotiate accepted by INAC

Inquiry

February

1998

In December 1998, government accepted claim for negotiation.

65 Opaskwayak, MB

Streets and lanes claim

First Nation withdrew claims during inquiry

Inquiry

February

2007

No substantive response from government required.

66 Paul, AB

Kapasiwin townsite Recommended claim not be accepted for negotiation

Inquiry

February

2007

Outcome as yet unknown.

67 Pasqua, SK

QVIDA flooding claim

ISCC recommendation to negotiate accepted by INAC

Inquiry

February

1998

In December 1998, government accepted claim for negotiation.

68 Peepeekisis, SK

File Hills Colony

ISCC recommendation to negotiate rejected by INAC

Inquiry

March

2004

In June 2006, government rejected recommendation.

69 Peguis, MB

Treaty land entitlement

Accepted for negotiation without full inquiry

Inquiry

March

2001

In June 1998, government accepted claim for negotiation while inquiry underway.

70 Qu'Appelle Valley Indian Development Authority (Cowessess, Kahkewistahaw, Muscowpetung, Ochapowace, Pasqua, Piapot, Sakimay), SK

Flooding claim

Parties unable to come to an agreement; separate negotiations ongoing with Cowessess, Muscowpetung, Pasqua, Sakimay

Mediation

December

2005

Outcome as yet unknown.

71 Roseau River Anishinabe, MB

1903 surrender

Recommended that claim be accepted for negotiation

Inquiry

September

2007

Outcome as yet unknown.

72 Roseau River Anishinabe, MB

Medical aid

ISCC recommendation to negotiate rejected by INAC

Inquiry

February

2001

In September 2003, government rejected recommendations, stating that medical aid deductions from the trust fund account were permissible, that no treaty promise of medical aid was made or survived, and that no outstanding lawful obligation exists.

73 Roseau River Anishinabe, MB

Treaty land entitlement

Settled with assistance of Commission

Mediation

March

1996

In March 1996, claim settled for $14 million in federal compensation.

74 Sakimay, SK

QVIDA flooding claim

ISCC recommendation to negotiate accepted by INAC

Inquiry

February

1998

In December 1998, government accepted claim for negotiation.

75 Sakimay, SK

Treaty land entitlement

Accepted for negotiation without full inquiry

Inquiry

February

2007

In September 2006, government accepted claim for negotiation while inquiry underway.

76 Sandy Bay Ojibway, MB

Treaty land entitlement

Recommended that claim not be accepted for negotiation

Inquiry

June

2007

Outcome as yet unknown.

77 Standing Buffalo, SK

QVIDA flooding claim

ISCC recommendation to negotiate accepted by INAC

Inquiry

February

1998

In December 1998, government accepted claim for negotiation.

78 Standing Buffalo, SK

QVIDA flooding claim

Settled with assistance of Commission

Mediation

March

2004

In March 2003, claim settled for $3.6 million in compensation and the ability to acquire up to 640 acres of agricultural land to be set apart as reserve land pursuant to Canada's Additions to Reserves Policy.

79 Sturgeon Lake, SK

Red Deer Holdings agricultural lease

Accepted for negotiation without full inquiry

Inquiry

March

1998

In October 1998, claim settled for $190,000 in federal compensation.

80 Sumas, BC

IR 6 railway right of way

ISCC recommendation to negotiate accepted by INAC

Inquiry

February

1995

In June 2005, government accepted claim for negotiation.

81 Sumas, BC

1919 surrender of IR 7

Recommended joint research to assess fair market value of surrendered land

Inquiry

August

1997

In January 1998, government stated it was willing to explore possibility of joint research to determine if evidence exists for a claim.

82 Taku River Tlingit, BC

Wenah specific claim

Recommended claim be accepted for negotiation

Inquiry

March

2006

Outcome as yet unknown.

83 Thunderchild, SK

1908 surrender

Settled with assistance of Commission

Mediation

March

2004

In September 2003, claim settled for $53 million in compensation and ability to acquire up to 5,000 acres of land within 15 years to be set apart as a reserve.

84 Touchwood Agency, SK

Mismanagement (1920-24) claim

Parties unable to come to an agreement; Agency requested ISCC inquiry

Mediation

August

2005

Outcome as yet unknown.

85 Walpole Island, ON

Boblo Island

ISCC recommendation that First Nation resubmit its claim under the Comprehensive Claims Policy, and that claim not be negotiated, accepted by INAC

Inquiry

May

2000

Outcome as yet unknown.

86 Waterhen Lake, SK

Primrose Lake Air Weapons Range II - loss of commercial and treaty harvesting rights

ISCC recommendation to negotiate part of claim, rejected by INAC

Inquiry

September

1995

In March 2002, government rejected recommendations made in September 1995 report, stating: "[C]ompensation for commercial harvesting rights was not based on either Indian status or membership in an Indian Band; rather, it was to be paid to anyone who held a licence on the land which became the Primrose Lake Air Weapons Range."

87 Williams Lake, BC

Village site

Recommended claim be accepted for negotiation

Inquiry

March

2006

Outcome as yet unknown.

88 Young Chipeewayan, SK

Stoney Knoll IR 107

Recommended that claim not be accepted for negotiation but that further research be undertaken

Inquiry

December

1994

Outcome as yet unknown.

2. List of Active ISCC Inquiries

As directed by Order in Council P.C. 2007-1789, the Commission is no longer accepting new claims for inquiry and has ceased all its activities on inquiries not yet at the community session stage. Work has ceased on inquiries which had not reached the community session stage on November 27, 2007, when Bill C-30, the Specific Claims Tribunal Act, was tabled. First Nations have been notified of the cessation of the ISCC's inquiry.

Carry the Kettle First Nation [1905 surrender]

Esketemc First Nation [Wright's meadow preemption claim]

Lower Similkameen Indian Band [Victoria, Vancouver and Eastern Railway right of way]

Lucky Man Cree [Treaty land entitlement - Phase II]

Muskowekwan First Nation [1910 and 1920 surrenders]

Nadleh Whut'en Indian Band [Lejac School]

Neskonlith, Adams Lake and Little Shuswap Bands [Neskonlith reserve]

Red Earth and Shoal Lake Cree Nations [Quality of reserve lands (agriculture)]

Sturgeon Lake First Nation [1913 surrender]

U'mista Cultural Centre [Prohibition of the potlatch]

3. List of Ceased ISCC Inquiries

Athabasca Chipewayan First Nation [Compensation criteria - agricultural benefits]

Blueberry River First Nation and Doig River First Nation [Compensation criteria - Highway right of way - IR 172 claim]

Chippewas of the Thames First Nation [Ontario Hydro right of way]

Conseil des Montagnais du Lac-Saint-Jean [Flooding of the Mashteuiatsh reserve in 1926]

Fisher River Cree Nation [1896 alienation claim]

Kitselas First Nation [Railway specific claim]

Lheidli T'enneh Band [Surrender Fort George IR 1]

Little Black Bear First Nation [1928 surrender]

Mississaugas of the New Credit [Crawford Purchase]

Mississaugas of the New Credit [Gunshot Treaty]

Ocean Man First Nation [Treaty land entitlement]

Pasqua First Nation [1906 surrender]

Shuswap Indian Band [1914 railway right of way]

Shuswap Indian Band [1,940 acres]

Siksika Nation [1910 surrender]

Stanjikoming First Nation [Treaty land entitlement]

Stó:lt Nation [Douglas reserves]

Touchwood Agency Tribal Council (Five First Nations) [Mismanagement claim - compensation criteria]

Treaty 8 Tribal Association (Seven First Nations) [Consolidated annuity claim]

Tsawwassen First Nation [English Bluffs specific claim]

Whitefish Lake First Nation [Agricultural benefits pursuant to Treaty 8: compensation criteria]

Whitefish Lake First Nation [Agricultural benefits pursuant to Treaty 8: historic claim]

Wolf Lake First Nation [Reserve lands]

4. List of Claims in Mediation/Facilitation

Blood Tribe/Kainaiwa [Cattle claim]

Chippewa Tri-Council [Coldwater-Narrows reservation claim]

Cote First Nation [Pilot project]

Cote First Nation [1905-07-13-14 surrenders claim]

Cowessess First Nation [Flooding claim]

Fort William First Nation [Boundary claim]

Fort William First Nation [Pilot project]

Fort Pelly Agency [Pelly Haylands claim]

George Gordon First Nation [Treaty land entitlement]

Lac Seul First Nation [Flooding claim]

Metepenagiag Mi'kmaq Nation [Hosford Lot and Indian Reserve 7 claim]

Michipicoten First Nation [Pilot project]

Missanabie Cree First Nation [Treaty land entitlement]

Mississaugas of the New Credit First Nation [Toronto Purchase claim]

Mohawk Council of Akwesasne [Dundee claim]

Mohawk Council of Akwesasne [Kawehno:ke claim]

Mohawks of the Bay of Quinte [Culbertson Tract]

Muscowpetung First Nation [Flooding claim]

Muskoday First Nation [Treaty land entitlement]

Nekaneet First Nation [Treaty benefits]

Pasqua First Nation [Flooding claim]

Pasqua First Nation [Treaty land entitlement claim]

Sakimay First Nation [Flooding claim]

Sakimay First Nation [Treaty land entitlement claim]

Siksika Nation [Castle Mountain claim]

Skway First Nation [Schweyey Road claim]

Sturgeon Lake First Nation [Treaty land entitlement]



Last Updated: 2008-04-01 Top of Page Important Notices