N.B. orders halt to land acknowledgments
Sparked by legal advice, move shuns recognition of Indigenous rights
Julianna Peter-Paul says it’s “just one more thing” the government of New Brunswick has done to her people “that will have to be reconciled later.”
The 27-year-old from the Metepenagiag Mi’kmaq Nation, who works part-time for the provincial archives, was stunned this week when the province ordered all government employees to stop giving land acknowledgments recognizing unceded Indigenous lands.
Behind the order lies litigation. New Brunswick is facing a massive Indigenous title claim, filed last October, in which the Wolastoqey Nation calls for acknowledgment of its traditional and ongoing right to land covering more than half the province.
In the face of that legal action, government lawyers have advised provincial employees to stop acknowledging they are on First Nations land.
Peter-Paul posted a response to Facebook on Friday, saying it’s the land that Indigenous people want to see in their care, not just a symbolic acknowledgment.
But by banning the acknowledgment — the “bare minimum,” she called it — the government of New Brunswick is moving in the wrong direction in its relationship with Indigenous people.
“It’s a matter of taking those steps to having what is inherently ours back,” Peter-Paul told the Star. “I don’t know if I’ll see it in my lifetime, but we want to live in peace and friendship just as much as they (the government) do.”
The memo said the order covered land or territorial acknowledgments during meetings and events, in documents and in email signatures. Employees can make reference to ancestral territory but not use the terms “unceded” or “unsurrendered,” the memo said.
Reaction came Friday not just from Peter-Paul — but from across the country.
Federal Indigenous Affairs Minister Carolyn Bennett tweeted Friday that she disapproved of the New Brunswick Conservative government’s decision, calling it “disappointing and not in the spirit of reconciliation.”
The six chiefs of the Wolastoqey Nation issued a statement saying they were deeply disappointed by the new policy. They said their title claim was made because the government continues to make decisions involving their traditional territory, including approving resource projects, without properly consulting the nation.
The nation says it does not seek to assume ownership of property owned by farmers and other residents in the province, but it does want the government to acknowledge its title.
“What they’re asking employees to do is take sides in a negotiation,” said Chief Patricia Bernard of the Madawaska Maliseet First Nation. “It’s astonishing that this is the legal advice they’re getting because they’re gagging people from saying specific words.”
Bernard said she thinks it could backfire on the province, as Indigenous and non-Indigenous civil servants who may not have been aware of the Wolastoqey title claim may now view the government’s approach as unreasonable.
Kate Gunn, a partner with First Peoples Law group, said that the memo is a signal that the government is prioritizing its legal position over its relationships with First Nations in the province.
“In doing this the way they did, there is a possibility it can damage that relationship,” she said.
Gunn said civil cases between governments and First Nations are not like other civil proceedings — governments are expected to work with nations as much as possible outside of court.
“If they are not allowing people to do a land acknowledgment it doesn’t speak well to the government’s commitment to reconciliation,” she said.
The Wolastoqey Nation signed Treaties of Peace and Friendship with the British Crown in the 18th century, which they say was an agreement to share and co-operate on — but not cede — their traditional territory.
Dozens of New Brunswickers heeded a call from the Wolastoqey Nation over Facebook to post a land acknowledgment on that platform.
“Say it loud,” the post, copied dozens of times by Friday evening reads, “I acknowledge that the lands on which New Brunswick is situated are the unceded and unsurrendered territories of the Welastekwiyik/Wolastoqiyik (Maliseet), Mi’kmaq/ Mi’kmaw and Peskotomuhkatiyik/Peskotomuhkati (Passamaquoddy).”
The chiefs of the nine Mi’kmaq communities in New Brunswick said land acknowledgments are largely a symbolic gesture but represent a starting point toward building and improving a relationship with First Nations — and that removing them represents “a new low” in relations with the province.
“It is hard to see how a government directive to employees to avoid taking even that bare minimum step has us moving forward on a path of reconciliation and partnership,” they wrote.
Chelsea Vowel, an assistant lecturer at the faculty of native studies at the University of Alberta, called the government’s directive a “hostile” move.
“These territorial acknowledgments were first brought forward by Aboriginal Peoples but they’ve been co-opted by institutions and politicians as a way to pay literal lip service to Indigenous Nations without actually doing anything by giving land back or addressing outstanding claims,” she said in an interview Friday.
“They clearly see land acknowledgment as an admission of guilt,” she added. “It’s really the only reason why they would caution their employees against using it.”
Peter-Paul said she doesn’t want to use the banned language anyways. The words “unceded” and “unsurrendered,” to her ears, are additions made by a colonial government.
When she speaks of the land, she’ll just refer to the Mi’kmaw, Wolastoqiyik and Peskotomuhkatiyik territory, no additions needed.
“There are a lot of people who want to have their rights back and want to see the land and take care of the land,” she said. “There’s a lot of healing that can be done for the people on the land.”