Poisoned Relationships

New blog post

This weekend I was provided with a letter that Taseko Mines President Russ Hallbauer sent to Federal Environment Minister Peter Kent last November. The letter was sent in advance of the new panel hearings into Taseko’s proposed Prosperity Project. Unfortunately, the letter clearly illustrates why the Tsilhqot’in (TNG) will fight, with every means available to them, Taseko’s right to the “Prosperity” ore body on their traditional territory. It also illustrates why some First Nations’ leaders are saying Prosperity is not only the wrong project, but the wrong company.

The letter asks Minister Kent, under threat of legal action by Taseko, to ensure that no First Nations person is put on the new review panel, to disallow any ceremonial activities during the panel hearings (drumming and prayers), to not allow children to demonstrate their concerns through plays, and to reject spirituality as a consideration in the mine proposal. The letter argues that emotional displays like drumming and children’s plays will, consciously or unconsciously, sway the panel in favour of the First Nations and against the “science” of Taseko’s case.

Taseko’s New Prosperity project overview, a public document, states: “the Tsilhqot'in have expressed the importance of the island in Teztan Biny (Fish Lake) as a place of spiritual power and healing.” Meanwhile, the private letter to Minister Kent states that the review panel “does not have any right to attribute significance to the spirituality of a place per se.” The company president’s letter does, however, acknowledge that the Supreme Court of Canada recognizes “custom, practice and tradition” that are “distinctive [to] aboriginal culture” as rights under the law.

Suggesting that spirituality can be divorced from “customs, practices and traditions” reflects a narrow view of First Nations’ culture. Anyone who has spent any time with First Nations elders or in a First Nations community knows that spirituality infuses their “customs, practices and traditions.” The drumming that Taseko would like the panel to disallow is a spiritual custom and practice; it’s not done for entertainment.

The Tsilhqot’in’s relationship with the land and its resources is spiritual, and according to Taseko’s public documents, it supposedly understands this fact. To suggest that this spiritual relationship with the land should be stripped from any presentations made by First Nations to the Prosperity Review Panel reveals either a deep ignorance of First Nations culture on the part of Taseko’s president or a deliberate attempt to undermine the TNG’s claim. One of the most compelling findings of the first panel was the TNG’s spiritual relationship with Fish Lake and its environs, and this was a major consideration in the conclusion to reject Taseko’s initial proposal.

I’ve warned Taseko on a number of occasions that they need to rethink their relationship with the TNG. I’ve even asked that they appoint new people to the project who will take a totally different approach to the TNG, one that is more respectful and more productive. Taseko’s provincial Environmental Assessment Certificate is predicated on maintaining “early, open, and full communication with First Nations,” recognizing and taking “into consideration the value and significance First Nations place on traditional, cultural and heritage knowledge and interest,” and developing “mutually beneficial partnerships with our First Nations neighbours.” I’m no lawyer, but if Taseko persists in poisoning their relationship with the TNG, then they may make themselves susceptible to a legal challenge against their provincial approvals.

Even in the highly politicized and deeply emotional debate surrounding the Gateway pipeline hearings, Enbridge has not challenged the First Nations’ right to incorporate their cultural practices into the hearing process. The pipeline hearings open with drumming and prayers, children are allowed to participate, and elders speak freely of their spiritual connection to the landbase that the pipeline will cross. Privately arguing that the Prosperity Panel should negate the TNG’s ability to freely express their deep and spiritual connection to the Fish Lake area will not help Taseko reach its ultimate goal – in fact, it will do the exact opposite.

The TNG have publicly stated they are not opposed to mining in their traditional territory. Other mining companies have been able to develop productive relationships with the TNG and other First Nations in the area. In particular, the Williams Lake Indian Band is breaking new ground on building relationships in the very early stages of project development. If Taseko chose to build a more constructive relationship with the TNG, would that not better serve the interests of the company and the interests of their shareholders?

To be fair to Taseko, the federal and provincial governments are ultimately to blame for many of the problems we have in addressing First Nations’ rights and title issues in project approval processes. Rights and title can only be resolved by the Crown outside of these processes. The only way to truly foster productive relationships between companies and First Nations is by resolving rights and title claims. Otherwise, the uncertainty associated with the assertion of First Nations’ rights ends up poisoning both the project approval process and the relationship that companies can have with First Nations in BC.

The Taseko Mines letter is available here.

Best regards,
Stephen Harrison
Legislative Assistant
Bob Simpson, Independent MLA, Cariboo North
250-387-8347
stephen.harrison@leg.bc.ca
http://bobsimpsonmla.ca/