http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20041130.wmetis1130/BNStory/National/
I do not want to have a conversation about Aboriginal rights. They are entrenched in section 35 of the constitution and have been repeatedly upheld in the courts.... Since the 70's, this has included the possibility of proving aboriginal title... something that has reemerged most recently in the Supreme Court's decision in the Haida decision.
What I am curious about is the question of Metis rights. Should aboriginal rights be read as to include metis? why or why not?.... also, could those who may have extra knowledge in this area, please share it so that the rest of us can catch up a bit? What are the criteria that we should be looking at? Is this about a distinct culture? Is it simply a part of aboriginal rights? How do we negotiate the possible floodgates argument that will be used to oppose metis rights? That is, how do we determine who would or would not be a benificiary of these rights? Whose place is it to make that decision (Government? Metis? Both?)?
The story that I have attached is about Inuit-Metis in Labrador however I believe that this is an issue all over the country. I believe that it was recently a big issue in the Yukon. It would be great if peopel could post newspaper/academic/other articles on the subject.
I do not want to have a conversation about Aboriginal rights. They are entrenched in section 35 of the constitution and have been repeatedly upheld in the courts.... Since the 70's, this has included the possibility of proving aboriginal title... something that has reemerged most recently in the Supreme Court's decision in the Haida decision.
What I am curious about is the question of Metis rights. Should aboriginal rights be read as to include metis? why or why not?.... also, could those who may have extra knowledge in this area, please share it so that the rest of us can catch up a bit? What are the criteria that we should be looking at? Is this about a distinct culture? Is it simply a part of aboriginal rights? How do we negotiate the possible floodgates argument that will be used to oppose metis rights? That is, how do we determine who would or would not be a benificiary of these rights? Whose place is it to make that decision (Government? Metis? Both?)?
The story that I have attached is about Inuit-Metis in Labrador however I believe that this is an issue all over the country. I believe that it was recently a big issue in the Yukon. It would be great if peopel could post newspaper/academic/other articles on the subject.
