Senator McCallum: You are aware, then, that all of Saskatchewan is covered by treaty. It is all unceded territory, so why is it under provincial jurisdiction?

Senator Cotter: All of the territory is covered by treaty, but most of the lands that are not reserves could be described as traditional territories. You are asking a question that is about provincial jurisdiction, but the view taken — as a result of the Natural Resources Transfer Agreement in the 1930s — was to transfer what Ottawa asserted it owned as federal lands into provincial lands.

The land that is governed by reserves is governed by First Nations. The lands that are traditional territories are subject to a more contentious set of authorities.

Hon. Patti LaBoucane-Benson (Legislative Deputy to the Government Representative in the Senate): Honourable senators, I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the document entitled A Self-Government Treaty Recognizing the Whitecap Dakota Nation / Wapaha Ska Dakota Oyate.

The Hon. the Speaker informed the Senate that a message had been received from the House of Commons with Bill C-51, An Act to give effect to the self-government treaty recognizing the Whitecap Dakota Nation / Wapaha Ska Dakota Oyate and to make consequential amendments to other Acts.

(Bill read first time.)

(Pursuant to the order adopted earlier this day, the bill is placed on the Orders of the Day for a second reading later this day.)

[English]

Hon. Brent Cotter moved second reading of Bill C-51, An Act to give effect to the self-government treaty recognizing the Whitecap Dakota Nation / Wapaha Ska Dakota Oyate and to make consequential amendments to other Acts.

He said: Before I begin, I want to acknowledge that Canada’s Senate is located on the unceded traditional territory of the Algonquin Anishinaabeg people.

I want to begin my remarks by talking about the War of 1812. Now, I wasn’t there, and I don’t think most of you were either, but it was a fairly important war. It was our only war with the United States of America, and you might recall that we won. Indeed, though lost to a degree in the mists of history, the political and governance structure of this continent and this country would be vastly different if that war had had a different outcome.

The Dakota were critical military allies of the British in that war. During the War of 1812, they defended what is Canada today and were presented with King George medals and promises that their lands and rights would be protected.

This was a major moment in an otherwise formative period of the Crown-Dakota/Lakota relationship that began in the mid-18th century, and in a context of increasing conflict between British North America and the United States.

In the years that followed, the Dakota did not feel particularly welcome — that is, those who resided in the United States — and Chief Whitecap was one of the leaders that journeyed north with his community to Canada. They wanted to remain part of a British territory and reminded authorities of the promises made to them.

It is an understatement to say that their commitment to British North America did not make them popular in the United States and, as I will emphasize later, since time immemorial the Dakota, and specifically the Whitecap Dakota, have governed themselves.

I will now say a few words about the history of the Dakota and, in particular, the Whitecap Dakota, and then a bit about self‑determination and self-government for the Whitecap Dakota First Nation and leading to this bill and agreement. In doing so, I hope to show why the bill we’re speaking about is critical to advancing reconciliation in Canada. I hope to show that, while some of the bill’s details might be new, the concepts of self-determination and self-government it is based on are not new. Indeed, what we’re doing is reviving what previously existed.

The Dakota are part of the Oceti Sakowin Oyate, the People of Seven Council Fires, which was an alliance of seven Dakota, Lakota and Nakota groups. These groups shared similar languages, history and culture and their territory spanned central regions of the United States and Canada.

The word “Dakota” means “friends, or allies” — meaningful in the context of the War of 1812, I think — and the Dakota/Lakota Nation successfully built alliances to establish peace and prosperity.

In the early 1860s, when many Dakota people sought refuge in the north, they were led by Chief Whitecap, Chief Standing Buffalo and Chief Little Crow. Chief Whitecap established his community along the South Saskatchewan River, and — you may find this amazing — went on to co-found the city of Saskatoon, my city.

Most of the bands are located in Manitoba and Saskatchewan. The Whitecap Dakota band is on a reserve about 30 kilometres south of Saskatoon. It is a small First Nation with a population of 692. It has a small parcel of reserve land, much smaller than other treaty nations in Saskatchewan. It’s near the South Saskatchewan River. It’s not on good land, and for more than a century the Whitecap Dakota struggled.

Let me speak a bit about its history, in particular dating to 1991, more recently, when Chief Darcy Bear became chief. The nation had an unemployment rate of 50%, its social and health services for its people were in tatters and the band’s finances were abysmal. Chief Bear told me recently that when he became chief, he was attending university and was in business school. As a student, he had a small amount of money in his bank account. By comparison, the band’s bank account had nothing and, in fact, it was overdrawn. He was, in a way, richer than his whole First Nation.

Where is the Whitecap Dakota Nation now? The band has developed services for its people in education, social services and health. It has established a range of business enterprises and it has an almost nonexistent unemployment rate. Among their best‑known businesses and enterprises are a First Nations casino — the most spectacular and successful in Saskatchewan — a world‑class golf resort and an adjacent hotel resort. When it opened, the Dakota Dunes Golf Links was selected the best new golf course in Canada. The Professional Golfer’s Association Tour Canada, or PGA, stops there every July.

The nation’s wise land management, a range of economic development initiatives and efforts to build a tax base for their own-source revenues is exceptional.

The Whitecap Dakota Nation is well known across Canada for this remarkable socio-economic development and the various successes of its business ventures and partnerships, many with the private sector and with the Province of Saskatchewan.

Though the reserve is small and the population, as I said, is only 692 people, its enterprises generate millions annually in own-source revenue for their community. This prosperity extends beyond Whitecap Dakota’s reserve and has significant benefits for neighbouring local businesses and the city of Saskatoon. For example, the on-reserve businesses employ as many non-First Nations people from off-reserve as there are citizens of the Whitecap reserve in total. About 650 non-members are employed at Whitecap; Whitecap is an economic engine for my city. In short, Whitecap is a strong, thriving community and has a long history of self-governance.

The Crown promised assistance and protection following their participation in the War of 1812. How did that work out?

Well, that promise was broken. Talk about breaking promises early. The war occurred in 1812, and promises were broken in the negotiations that concluded with the Treaty of Ghent in 1815 — three years later. These are the negotiations that ended the War of 1812.

The Dakota were not welcomed by the Crown as allies. Instead, they were permitted to stay in Canada but branded as “American-Indian refugees” in the decades that followed. When the Crown began entering into the numbered treaties with First Nations in Western Canada in the late 1860s, the Dakota were purposefully excluded from the numbered treaties.

As a result of unfair policy decisions made over a century ago, the Dakota have been denied formal recognition as Aboriginal peoples of Canada under section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 — denied recognition as Aboriginal peoples until, hopefully, Thursday of this week. In every way but one, the Dakota nations have been treated as any other First Nation, Your Honour, and, generally speaking, the treatment has not been favourable. They were subjected to the Indian Act, residential schools, the Sixties Scoop, the pass system, the theft of their children, the reserve system and various other laws and policies that have failed Indigenous people and Canada writ large. The Dakota have shared in this experience and, at the same time, do not even have a constitutional foothold the way that other Indigenous communities have. They continue to exist today as “American-Indian refugees,” present in Canada at the pleasure of the Crown.

The Whitecap Dakota self-government treaty we’re talking about today in Bill C-51 will change all of that. It will reinforce the Dakota spirit of alliance, as was recognized way back when. What does the Whitecap Dakota Nation think of this bill? It is acknowledged to be the next step toward the First Nation’s vision of self-determination. The treaty is a product of 12 years of negotiations. Senator Arnot was an early proponent of this, and I hope he will speak about it himself in his remarks. It was approved by Whitecap Dakota membership through a community approval campaign that was aligned with their customary decision-making processes with 92% support in the fall. When, finally, the membership voted on this governance treaty, the vote was 100% in favour. Sounds fairly positive to me: strong community support.

What does Bill C-51 do? The bill does two things: First, it recognizes Whitecap Dakota as a First Nation pursuant to section 35 of the Constitution. This changes their status from refugees to an Aboriginal people recognized under section 35, correcting more than a century of injustice. Second, it removes Dakota Whitecap from the oversight of most aspects of the Indian Act and recognizes a range of governmental authorities for Dakota Whitecap in the self-government treaty. As we know, many federal laws and policies, including the Indian Act, have constrained First Nations governance.

First, the Indian Act imposed a colonial form of governance on Dakota Whitecap, and so many other First Nations, with limited forms of local administration. For decades, the Dakota Whitecap have been working to leave the Indian Act. They had a series of initiatives from 1989 to 2012 and have removed themselves, as if percentages matter, from about 35% of the Indian Act’s control over Whitecap Dakota — steps toward reclaiming self‑governance.

To replace this very large Indian Act framework in this treaty and self-government agreement, the governance treaty provides that the Government of Canada will recognize the First Nation and give it jurisdiction over core governance; membership; language and culture; lands management; emergencies; public order; peace and safety; taxation; environment; resource management; agriculture; public works and infrastructure; local traffic and transportation; wills and estates; education; health; licensing, regulation and operation of businesses; economic development; alcohol, gaming and intoxicants; landlord and tenant matters; and the administration and enforcement of Whitecap Dakota laws. It’s a pretty spectacular range of governmental authority.

I want to say a word or two about taxation, and here I will leave my prepared remarks, if I may.

One of the great constraints of the Indian Act and the Canadian relationship with First Nations, in my view, is that we have not moved to models like own-source revenues and the building of financially accountable governments. We have relied too much on transfers from Ottawa.

We need to build the models of government that communities need and want. One of the keys to that is building a taxation regime that a government can administer itself. From my briefs with government officials over the past few days, I understand the Department of Finance has been working to negotiate a complementary real property tax agreement and tax treatment agreement setting out the scope of Whitecap Dakota’s tax jurisdiction on reserve lands.

The department highlighted that Whitecap Dakota have proven successful with innovative taxation tools and powers and that these complementary agreements yet to come will provide the community with added taxation powers to advance this interest. In fact, the real property tax agreement set out in this legislation is the first agreement of its kind in the country.

Senators, this is good legislation. It puts decision-making power back in the hands of Indigenous governments to make their own choices about how to deliver programs and services to their own communities. The bill also, I should say parenthetically, renames the self-governing entity the Whitecap Dakota Nation. They lost their name when they left the Indian Act, and they needed a new one. This is the one the community wanted, and it is a good one.

This bill is a major step to revive self-governance and self‑determination for the Whitecap Dakota people who have contributed to our country for a very long time, and that contribution has not been well recognized. It is also an important step for reconciliation, moving past colonialism and paternalism, toward legislation grounded in equality and respect.

Honourable senators, I encourage you to join me in taking this next step.

Thank you, pidamayado.

Hon. David M. Arnot: Honourable senators, I rise to speak in support of Bill C-51, An Act to give effect to the self-government treaty recognizing the Whitecap Dakota Nation / Wapaha Ska Dakota Oyate and to make consequential amendments to other acts.

Colleagues, Bill C-51 represents a full circle moment for me. More than 25 years ago, I was the Treaty Commissioner for Saskatchewan, and I had a mandate to research, document and capture the meaning of the treaties in a modern context in the Province of Saskatchewan.

In January 1999, the minister of the former Department of Indian and Northern Affairs and Northern Development and the chief of the Federation of Sovereign Indigenous Nations, or FSIN, directed me to facilitate discussions between the Dakota and the Lakota on treaty adhesion claims in Saskatchewan.

There are three Dakota First Nations in what is now Saskatchewan — the Standing Buffalo, the Wahpeton and the Whitecap — and there is one Lakota First Nation: Wood Mountain. These First Nations never negotiated treaties, or adhesions, with Canada. It was not, however, for a lack of trying on their part.

Mr. James Morrison, a legal and historical researcher, found that several Dakota chiefs had expressed interest in adhering to the treaties at the time they were made — Treaty 4 in 1874, and Treaty 6 in 1876: According to the minutes of the council with Treaty 4 commissioners, Lieutenant Governor Alexander Morris told the Dakota that they should settle away from the American border. They would be entitled to the same consideration as the Dakota who had been offered reserve lands on the Little Saskatchewan River, which is now in part of Manitoba.

In 1862, Chief Whitecap, came north of the 49th parallel after the Minnesota massacres. However, the Dakota people had been in the territory for centuries before that, and they were able to demonstrate that.

In 2003, I was fortunate to see and hold a centuries-old medal during the discussion at the treaty table. This medal, known as the “Lion and Wolf” medal and called “Mazaska Wanpin” by the Dakota, represents the forging of the relationship with the Crown.

This medal was on display at the Office of the Treaty Commissioner for some time. If you looked at the obverse side of the medal, you could see that it was well worn and you could tell that it was proudly worn by Dakota chiefs for some 200 years.

On August 17, 1778, in Montreal, 11 Dakota chiefs received “Lion and Wolf” medals from the British general Frederick Haldimand. The lion symbolized the British Crown, and the wolf symbolized the American government nipping at the heels of the lion. The chiefs were given the medals because they were essential in the British campaigns in Illinois and Kentucky during the American Revolution.

The Dakota also received seven “Lion and Wolf” medals during the War of 1812, most likely in June of 1812 at Chief Wabasha’s village. Dakota warriors played an integral role in the British capture of Michilimackinac and the siege of the American Fort Meigs during that war.

A much more unique and compelling history of the bond between the Crown and the Dakota people was offered during discussions at the treaty table in Saskatchewan.

I wrote a report recommending that the Dakota people be allowed to adhere to Treaty 4 and Treaty 6, respectively. I also recommended that, in the alternative, Canada enter into treaty discussions with the Dakota people because the Government of Canada could choose to enter into treaty with whomever they want to, and that should happen in a modern context. Most importantly, it would be the right thing to do.

Despite the goodwill and good faith of the parties to the discussion, and despite the hours of interest-based discussions that took place, the process — which I was part of — was ultimately not successful. However, I believe that those original efforts laid the groundwork for the bill we are considering today. The comprehensive self-government negotiations, which began anew in 2009, were built on the relationships that were forged a decade earlier at the treaty discussions in Saskatchewan.

An understanding, appreciation and acceptance of the oral history, as well as the historical record, bring us here today. There is much evidence that the Dakota people had been in the territory for centuries. Historical records tell us that even in the absence of treaty signing or adhesion in the latter half of the 1800s, promises were made to the Dakota people.

Dr. Sarah Carter, professor of history at the University of Alberta, detailed the meeting with Treaty Commissioner and Lieutenant-Governor Alexander Morris, on September 16, 1874:

[Chief] White Cap began by saying that “he does not know what to do as he heard the country is going to be sold and wants advice on how to live. He puts his hand in the governor’s to show he shakes hands with the Queen —

— Queen Victoria —

— His ancestors used to do the same.” Morris said that we don’t want all your friends [from the United States] to come over . . . [However] who have been here a number of years it is different. He stated he had the ability to give each family 80 acres of land.

Colleagues, the first statement in the preamble of Bill C-51 clarifies the importance of history as we look to the future. It states:

Whereas the Whitecap Dakota Nation and the Government of Canada recognize distinctive historical relationships between certain Dakota communities and the Crown based on, at various times, treaties or alliances of peace and friendship . . . .

With an understanding of the past, and as we reflect on the needs of the present — as the drafters of Bill C-51 have done — this act requires us to look to the future of the Whitecap Dakota First Nation, a future largely free from the constraints of the ndian Act, founded on the principle of the inherent right to self‑government and based on a government-to-government relationship.

We are all aware that the Whitecap Dakota First Nation signed their self-government treaty with Canada on May 2, 2023. This treaty confirms Whitecap Dakota First Nation’s jurisdiction on their reserve lands over governance, natural resources, membership, financial management and accountability, health, language and culture promotion and preservation, and education. Affirming their section 35 constitutional rights as Aboriginal peoples signifies a historic shift in Canada’s position on the Dakota and enables ongoing reconciliation.

Bill C-51 and this governance treaty have been a long time coming for the Whitecap Dakota peoples, their community and leaders — by one estimate, nearly 140 years.

Colleagues, I wish to acknowledge the leadership, guidance and determination of Chief Darcy Bear. Chief Bear is an extraordinary leader, relationship builder and entrepreneur. I have had the good fortune to get to know him and work with him over the course of the last 30 years. He has been notably successful in many areas, including housing on the reserve, the creation of a casino and hotel, and the establishment of a world‑class golf course, as has been mentioned.

I also want to acknowledge the contributions of two long-time councillors, Mr. Frank Royal and Mr. Dwayne Eagle.

I am grateful to the elders who help guide Chief Bear and his community. They were also involved in the processes in which I took part.

I am deeply indebted to Elder Melvina Eagle and the late Elder Mel Littlecrow — two elders who freely provided their knowledge, wisdom and guidance to the parties and to me those many years ago. Their knowledge is fundamental to this bill, to the relationships that have been forged and to the reconciliation that this treaty represents, which is encompassed in this bill.

Colleagues, the Whitecap Dakota First Nation people have always had high expectations for their community and for themselves. Bill C-51 acknowledges their rightful place within the Canadian state. I believe this legislation is in Canada’s best interest, and I ask you to join me in supporting this bill, which rights a historical wrong and represents a modern-day example of reconciliation. Thank you.

[Translation]