Consent, Not Consultation : Alberta Treaty Chiefs Are Reclaiming the Pipeline Narrative

by John Wirth, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter 

(ANNews) – To hear Alberta government representatives reflect on their January 13th meeting, delegates of the Confederacy of Treaty No. 6, 7, and 8 had given “thoughtful guidance” and “valuable insights.” To the Chiefs in the room, however, it was an essential line in the sand statement of sovereignty that the province must meet on common ground if they ever want to make progress getting Alberta crude to flow through the North-West Coast Oil Pipeline.

While Minister of Energy Brian Jean promotes a new digital “transparency hub” and Minister of Indigenous Relations Rajan Sawhney’s statement focused on “shaping the direction” of the work, the other side was far more specific. Their message was not about providing feedback; it was about jurisdiction.

By sticking to diplomatic boilerplate, the province avoids addressing the Confederacy’s most pointed demand: that further dialogue will only occur if First Nations are recognized as full partners from the outset – not merely consulted after decisions, like the Smith-Carney MOU, have already been made.

The Room Where It happened

Notably, the Treaty Chiefs were not the only Indigenous leaders present, the Métis Settlement General Council (MSGC) was also at the table, representing a distinct, legal and economic perspective of their Nation in Alberta. While the province often points to the MSGC’s interest in ownership stake as a sign of “Indigenous support,” the presence of both groups underscores a complex reality. The MSGC leadership, including President Dave Lamouche, has expressed a desire to work with both the government and, if possible, broker alignment with First Nations communities to aid the project. If nothing else, exploring alternatives if consensus cannot be reached. For the Treaty Chiefs, a business deal cannot substitute the requirement for consent.

Treaty 6: Standing firm on inherent rights

The Treaty 6 delegation, led by Grand Chief Joey Pete has made it clear that getting their acceptance after plans are nearly complete is no longer sufficient. He has said that Indigenous people are “rights-holders” and not “stakeholders.” The new standard is free, prior, and informed consent. The government has not cleared the first hurdle. The Confederacy remains united: no support has been given to any route, and the province’s July 1st ticking clock does not override the Treaty.

A New Era of Leadership

The meeting marks one of the first major political tests for Grand Chief Joey Pete (Sunchild First Nation). Since his appointment in December, Grand Chief Pete has frequently cited the wisdom of his elders as his guiding light.

“As a boy, my grandmother told me we would face challenges to Treaty in the future and we’re seeing that now,” says Grand Chief Pete. He warns that, “It is time for our Nations to stand strong and united. Creator gave our Peoples Inherent Rights to be who we are – to lead as stewards of our Lands and to foster connection with Mother Earth. Our history is written on our landscapes; our connection to the land is eminent. We must speak for those who cannot speak for themselves.”

Treaty 8: The Keepers of The Source.

Since time immemorial, the peoples of Treaty 8 have lived and maintained the land where the bitumen begins. The Treaty 8 leader Grand Chief Trevor Mercredi has set detailed technical conditions. They demand a nation-to-nation decision-making process, calling out the “Smith-Carney MOU” (memorandum of understanding: a formal, often non-binding, document outlining the preliminary understanding, goals, and intentions between parties before a final, legally enforceable contract is drafted), for its silence on clean drinking water.

In the statement, the Grand Chief asserts that “adequate, upfront funding” is necessary for their own independent experts to leverage their knowledge and end a reliance on skewed provincial data regarding future impacts to the watershed. With this, Mercredi demands an ongoing 2% royalty share for his nations.

Treaty 7: Acknowledging Hypocrisy 

Chief Troy Knowlton (Piikani Nation) recently criticized the federal budget and the pipeline MOU for being “woefully inadequate” in addressing infrastructure gaps (like clean water and adequate housing) while the province grovels for pipeline access.

​Their message is that if the province can find billions for a pipeline, they can find the billions required to close the $350 billion infrastructure gap on First Nations. They are tired of “fancy words on status quo.”

Conclusion 

As the province races toward its self-imposed July 1st deadline to submit a formal application to the federal government, the Indigenous leaders of Alberta stand resolute for a unified policy front that demands independent environmental data, a share of the land’s wealth, and an end to the “fancy words” that have historically left Indigenous infrastructure in the dark.