Reconciliation is not an easy process

There has been an effort in Canada over the past few years to come to terms with our colonial history and the impact we had on the original inhabitants of this place.

Part of that is working towards resolution in how we resolve the past and move into the future.

This is not been an easy process. There has been a lot of negative history and lack of trust to work through. The word being used to describe this process is “reconciliation,” and it’s clear from recent events in Newfoundland and Labrador that governments are still learning how this process will work — and what the word actually means.

On April 21, the government introduced a motion in the House of Assembly to change the name of Red Indian Lake, in central Newfoundland, to Wantaqo’ti Qospem, meaning “peaceful lake” in the Mi’kmaq language. This decision was made in consultation with the leaders of the five recognized Indigenous groups in the province as part of the reconciliation process. Indigenous Affairs Minister Lisa Dempster stated publicly that the decision was final.

But the announcement was met by a lot of opposition from a number of areas, including local residents who felt they were not given any say in this decision.

While it appears the name change was made with good intentions, the process that was followed is not totally in line with the aims of reconciliation because of the lack of thorough consultation.

For local residents, the primary objection — beyond not being consulted — was using a Mi’kmaq word which didn’t reflect the history and tradition of the area. The lake is associated with the nowextinct Beothuk people who hunted and overwintered along its shores. Local residents feel any name change should reflect this history.

The provincial government had recently repatriated the remains of Nonosabasut and Demasduit, two Beothuk people who were originally buried there and whose remains were removed around 200 years ago and brought to Scotland. This unfortunate event from our colonial past can now be rectified and it is felt that re-interring their remains at this site is the most appropriate place to do so.

To the credit of those who made the renaming decision, they have since announced it is put on hold until everyone involved can be consulted. While there have been some hurt feelings and unkind sentiments expressed over this process, that’s to be expected if we are to get this process right.

There appears to be widespread agreement that a name change is required and it is a hopeful sign that local residents want to ensure that the Beothuk people are recognized through this process, especially as they can no longer speak for themselves.

There is also no intent to sugarcoat or deny the events that occurred to the Beothuk around this lake, including the killing of the two Beothuk whose remains were eventually stolen, and this is important as we move forward with reconciliation.

This site can become a place where the whole story of the Beothuk can be told, both the sad history of their extinction and the positive stories of how they lived on this land for centuries.

That we are talking about this is a good sign that all sides are willing to work on this difficult process. That the government was willing to back down and take the time to consult more widely is also commendable.

Hopefully, they have learned that reconciliation is not just a process that happens among the leaders of nations; for it to work, the people need to be consulted and involved in the decisionmaking — both Indigenous people and the settler population. In this instance, it was the local people who appear to have had the best ideas of how to move forward with this name change.