1 Briefing prepared by After the Occupation: Process Agreement Update April 1, 2015 Kate Kempton

2 HISTORY Treaty 5 (1875): Signed by Tepastenam Different understanding of parties: Supposed to be about sharing and equality, but means taking and subjugation to Crown Indian Act (1876) Racism, dispossession, creation of Band system

3 HISTORY Northern Flood Agreement (1977) Supposed to remedy “taking” and damages from Hydro development Not well implemented Section 35 of Canada’s Constitution High level status to Aboriginal and Treaty rights under Canadian law Has not gone far enough

JENPEG OCCUPATION 2014: Crown still taking, NFA still not being implemented, Crown controlling Hydro project.

 October 6, Letter and Eviction notice to Scott Thompson, CEO and President, Manitoba Hydro from Chief Catherine Merrick  October 17, The people of Pimicikamak evict Manitoba Hydro from the Jenpeg Generation Station on Kichi Sipi TIMELINE

 November 5, Pimicikamak, Manitoba Hydro and Manitoba Sign Memorandum of Agreement  November 27, Signed Process Agreement TIMELINE

 Agreement between Pimicikamak, the government of Manitoba and Manitoba Hydro PROCESS AGREEMENT

Process to address taking and subjugation from Hydro Project. Goals: 1.SHARING:  Full NFA implementation  Revenue sharing 2.EQUALITY:  Mutual NFA implementation  Co-management over Hydro operations PROCESS AGREEMENT

 3 Parties (Pim, MB, MH):  Make major decisions  “Main Table”:  Where 3 parties negotiate and make decisions to implement Northern Flood Agreement  “Working Group”  Technical work on workplans, budgets, plans for revenue sharing, etc.  Brings all work to Main Table for approval 9 THE “MAIN TABLE” Main Table Working Group Pimicikamak, Manitoba, Manitoba Hydro

 Legally binding on Manitoba and Hydro.  Different from 1998 political accord from NFA Crown parties, after road protest. PROCESS AGREEMENT

 Article 6:  Improved NFA relationship and implementation, new program funding  Article 7:  Policy Issues: revenue sharing, co-management, etc.  Article 8:  Improving financial management PROCESS AGREEMENT

 Manitoba and Manitoba Hydro fund Pimicikamak’s work under the Process Agreement  Process costs:  Representatives, lawyers, and experts at Main Table and Working Group  Development of workplans and budget at Working Group  Substance costs:  Programs for NFA Article 6, Article 7, Article 8, etc.  Administrative costs: Pimicikamak office and staff FUNDING

 Programs to implement NFA  Multiplex planning, softball field, fuel wood, safety monitoring, etc.  Reserve 19D resolution  Accommodation for cumulative effects of Hydro Project  Bipole III work camps: consultation and accommodation  Financial /Management systems for Pimicikamak DISCUSSIONS THUS FAR

 Finalizing 19D settlement  Status of Pimicikamak under the NFA (April)  Revenue Sharing (June) UPCOMING ISSUES

 NFA claims still being actively pursued.  Some may be settled through negotiations at Main Table.  Ongoing claims:  11 (recreation)  34 (employment)  43 (land exchange)  109 (damages for Nednak road/bridge)  131 (navigable waters)  164 (health impacts)  183 (Jenpeg forebay debris)  648 (consultation re: Keeyask) NFA ARBITRATION CLAIMS

16 QUESTIONS