The Ontario Mining Act, Political Prisoners and the Right to Say "NO"
Joan Kuyek
______________________________________________________________
In February 2008, the leadership of the Ardoch Algonquins were
sentenced for contempt because of their unwavering opposition to
uranium exploration on their traditional territory in eastern Ontario.
Bob Lovelace, a university professor from Queen's University and an
Ardoch spokesperson, was sentenced to six months detention and fined
$25,000 (with further costs against himself and other community members
pending). Chief Paula Sherman was fined $15,000. Leaders of the Shabot
Obaadjiwan First Nation also face contempt charges.
On March 17th, the Chief and five members of the Council from
Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug (KI) in far northern Ontario were
sentenced to six months in jail for their peaceful opposition to
drilling for platinum on their traditional lands. Charges against
former KI spokesperson John Cutfeet will be heard on June 2. The
Aboriginal leaders say it is their responsibility to protect their
lands from drilling.
Non-native property owners in southern Ontario have also been charged
with contempt. They are protecting their own lands from mineral
staking, as well as supporting the indigenous struggle. On March 18th,
the Superior Court in Kingston dismissed charges against three of them,
including Frank Morrison, but the next day, six other "settlers" were
charged with contempt just for being in the vicinity of the mine site.
Their charges have not yet been heard.
** Why is there a growing outcry? **
There is a growing outcry across Ontario, demanding an end to mining's
privileged access to land, and the right of affected peoples and
communities to be able to say "no" to mineral exploration and mining
development. A loose collaboration of groups from the Aboriginal,
environmental, social justice, anti-poverty, development and human
rights communities have come together to demand that the Ontario Mining
Act be changed. There are weekly rallies and protests across the
province.
At least 11 other First Nations in northern Ontario have called for a
halt to staking and drilling on their traditional territories;
Twelve municipalities and 2 counties in southern Ontario have supported
requests for a moratorium on uranium exploration and mining in the
Ottawa River Watershed.
The Ottawa City Council passed a resolution on February 27, 2008
petitioning the Province of Ontario and Premier Dalton McGuinty to
initiate an immediate moratorium on uranium mineral prospecting,
exploration and mining in Eastern Ontario and the Ottawa River
watershed until such a time that all environmental and health issues
related to uranium mining and native land claims are resolved. The City
also asked Ontario to undertake an immediate comprehensive public
review of the Mining Act.
No less a voice than the Environmental Commissioner of Ontario (ECO)
called for reform of the Mining Act in his December 2007 report.
The ECO stated, "he existing regulatory structure treats public land as
freely open to mineral exploration. The consideration of other
interests, such as protection of ecological values, is reactionary, and
the question of whether mineral development may be inappropriate is not
answered upfront. Instead it is assumed that mineral development is
appropriate almost everywhere and that it is the "best" use of Crown
land in almost all circumstances."
** What is Free Entry? **
The free entry system is a method of granting mineral rights and giving
the mining industry free access to lands in its search of minerals. It
is the system of mineral tenure in place throughout Canada with the
exception of Alberta. Ontario's Mining Act allows exploration
activities, including felling trees, blasting and drilling, trenching
and the construction of temporary roads and shelters, without any
public consultation or environmental assessment. When and if an
economically viable mineral deposit is found, there is no effective bar
to the development of a mine.
Free entry is an old European concept based on the right to minerals
regardless of who owns the surface rights. The Mining Act of Ontario
was passed in 1873 and was developed at a time when picks and shovels
were used for mining. Technology has changed dramatically over the
years, but the system has not. It gives individuals and mining
companies the exclusive right to Crown-owned mineral substances from
the surface of a mineral claim downwards.
There are three primary rights associated with the system of free
entry: • The right of entry and access on the majority of land • The
right to locate and have a claim recorded without consulting land
users; • The right to acquire a mining lease with no discretion on the
part of the Crown.
The Mining Act free entry system fails to recognize First Nations on a
nation-to-nation basis and as treaty partners and violates First Nation
constitutional rights to consultation and accommodation prior to
government decisions being made that might affect their interests.
** What are some of the demands? **
The collaboration of groups that have come together to end Free Entry
and secure justice for the political prisoners are demanding that the
provincial government: • Stop allowing the staking of claims and mining
leases ,and/or exploration that violates constitutionally protected
Aboriginal rights, including the right to consultation and
accommodation; • Comprehensively reform the Mining Act (including the
free entry system) in consultation with Aboriginal peoples and with
other affected stakeholders to reconcile differing land values prior to
exploration and prospecting, ensure the protection of the natural
environment , incorporate the right of affected peoples to say "no" to
mineral exploration and development , and recognize Aboriginal and
treaty rights. Replace it with a permit system.
• Undertake an independent and effective environmental assessment of
each stage of mineral activity. Include an assessment of the cumulative
impacts of proposed exploration and mining projects. Incorporate public
participation and provide funding to intervenors to make this
effective. • Enter into good faith negotiations with the KI and
Algonquin peoples to ensure their rights are fully respected and that
the land in dispute is withdrawn from staking. • Grant an amnesty for
any persons charged with contempt in these case, and release Lovelace,
and the KI6 from jail.
** What are the underlying economic issues? **
When the mineral industry talks about "sustainable mining," they
neglect to tell us that • most mines last less than 15 years, • mining
is in fact a waste management industry, leaving behind as much as 30
tonnes of waste rock and toxic tailings for every ounce of gold it
extracts, which will have to be monitored and managed forever • the
local community may get some jobs and contracts from the mine, the
government may get something in taxes, but the profits will
overwhelmingly flow to major shareholders of the company • Local
communities bear the brunt of the environmental and health costs during
and after the mine, and are often ill equipped to protect their
interests.
Although it may create short-term capital infusion for desperate
communities, mining does not provide a sustainable base for the
development of local economies. The government investments that are
required to open new mines and keep mines operating, would be better
spent on remediation and closure, on sustainable, closed-loop and
import-substitution economic development for remote communities, on
research and support for metals recycling, and on caring for the health
concerns of affected residents.
Where mining does take place, it must be made to better serve the
development needs for an entire region, through effective land use
planning and decent resource rents.
At present, the greatest government investment in communities where
mining is declining is in keeping the mining sector going through
subsidies; through finding a new ore body; and/or through re-mining
tailings and waste rock etc. Once a region commits to one mine, it is
committing to mining as long as ore can be found. The mining industry
advocates for planning policies that "sterilize" areas of significant
mineral potential from development other than mining. In the long run,
as the environment becomes more polluted, everyone comes out worse.
The junior mining industry which does most of the exploration, is, in
fact, only mining investors, and provides more jobs and economic
stimulation on Bay Street than it does in the north. Most rich deposits
have already been depleted; the cost of developing new mines is
spiralling out of control; and credit is very hard to find. The only
companies able to build new mines now are large multi-nationals that
have been able to benefit from high commodity prices, and have cash to
burn. Increasingly, they are using their wealth in mergers and
acquisitions.
This is not a pretty picture, and is likely to get worse.
Joan Kuyek is National Coordinator of MiningWatch Canada
