TIMMINS - It is believed there is enough mineral wealth within the Ring of Fire to boost the Northeastern economy for decades to come.
However, any excitement from the mining industry has been tempered by a sense of impending conflict with First Nation communities in the region.
Phil Fontaine, former national chief of Assembly of First Nations, suggested conflicts are inevitable if mining companies play by the “old rules” and try imposing their will onto First Nation communities.
“Resource interests should strive to negotiate with First Nations up front instead of the way it was done in the past, as an afterthought,” said Fontaine, who was a keynote speaker at the Big Event mining expo in Timmins Thursday.
He stressed the importance of gaining an understanding and appreciation of the history and values of the people within the communities in which mining companies are proposing to work.
Fontaine noted when the discovery of the Ring of Fire was initially announced, there was “great excitement” about the “significant possibilities” for this region.
“The immediate response in the south was it will transform the region,” he said.
However, within the James Bay lowlands, the immediate response was concern about traplines, traditional hunting grounds and land rights.
For those who only saw the region for its potential billions of dollars in minerals, the notion that anyone would be worried about traplines was “thought absurd,” Fontaine said.
Even if companies are up front in their negotiations with First Nations, Fontaine said there are no guarantees to compliance. Industry needs to understand communities always have the prerogative to oppose a development proposal.
“One shouldn’t be alarmed at all when that happens,” Fontaine said to his luncheon audience in the McIntyre ballroom.
“Every community has a right to say no, just as they have a right to say yes. It would be unreasonable to think that they would say yes (to proposed developments) all the time.”
However, Fontaine said people shouldn’t gain the notion that First Nation communities are opposed to development. In fact, he added, it is the opposite.
“There would be very strong and valid reasons why a community would choose to say no. But that doesn’t mean a community is shutting the door to all future development. It may be no to that particular development or it may be no to some aspects of that development. So it’s incumbent upon both parties to come together ... to talk about why the position may be no at this stage and how it can become yes.
“First Nation people are not anti-development. They are very much pro-development, in favour of pure responsible development.”
On the prospects within the Ring of Fire, Fontaine said, “The possibilities are endless. We’re talking here about the need to create healthier, safer First Nation communities ... There is really no need for the kind of poverty that exists in too many First Nation communities in the midst of incredible wealth in this country.”
In the past, there have been conflicts that arose in this region when exploration companies claimed they were unaware of any First Nation interests on lands they were doing work on.
The onus to knowing that, Fontaine said, falls onto the companies themselves.
“There is a responsibility on that mining company to know the community or know the communities, to have an appreciation and understanding of treaties and the treaty relationship, land rights, interests to water. And there is a responsibility on the part of the First Nation community or communities to impart whatever knowledge they possess about those interests, so that it is a process of equals.”
Fontaine added, “We’re talking here about meaningful consultation. It’s not coming in and telling a community we’re going to proceed this way and that’s how it’s going to be. Or to think that if you pick up the phone and said hello to this chief or that chief, that you are somehow consulting that chief or that community. That’s not meaningful consultation.”