ÎYÂRHE NAKODA – Two of the three Îyârhe Nakoda First Nations say they will not join Bearspaw First Nation’s recently launched class action lawsuit against the federal government over Treaty 7 annuity payments, citing a lack of consultation and an ongoing commitment to a negotiated settlement approach.
Chiniki First Nation and Goodstoney First Nation learned about Bearspaw’s legal action – which seeks to increase the historic $5 annuity set in 1877 to match current economic realities – at the same time as the general public.
According to interviews with Chiniki and Goodstoney officials, there was no prior contact or invitation to join the class action before Bearspaw’s Nov. 26 announcement.
“At no time prior to Bearspaw’s press release were the Chiniki or Goodstoney First Nations advised, contacted, or consulted regarding the aforementioned lawsuit,” the two Nations stated in a joint release.
Both have since reiterated their intention to remain at the negotiating table, a process they say began months before Bearspaw’s claim was filed.
Chiniki CEO Ryan Robb said the First Nation has been engaged with Canada in annuity-related discussions since late spring or early summer of this year.
Goodstoney CEO Dean Cherkas noted the First Nation entered the process shortly after Chiniki.
Both leaders stressed that their Nations prefer the negotiation route over litigation, referencing the federal government’s efforts to address similar treaty claims at negotiation tables elsewhere in Canada.
They said these negotiation processes often prove more time-efficient, cost-effective, and collaborative than lengthy court battles.
“We were already in process with Canada, looking at a more negotiated path for annuities,” said Robb. “It wouldn’t make sense for us to leave that path and go into litigation.”
Cherkas echoed the sentiment, stating pursuing legal action could stall or derail the progress made through negotiations.
“It’s more practical for us to maintain our discussions at the negotiation table,” he said. “Litigation can take years and cost more, whereas negotiations have a track record of achieving resolution more quickly and at a lower cost.”
Bearspaw’s class action has been filed but not yet certified by the courts. For the claim to proceed as a class action, other Treaty 7 Nations would typically be invited to participate or “opt-in.” Without certification, the litigation is still in its early stages, and its future remains uncertain.
Robb and Cherkas confirmed that as of Monday (Dec. 16), there had been no direct consultation or formal discussions between Bearspaw and the other two Îyârhe Nakoda First Nations regarding the lawsuit’s details, potential legal fees, or strategies.
Cherkas added that the broader relationship among the three Îyârhe Nakoda First Nations has historically been, and continues to be, civil and professional.
“At the same time, there is no point in us taking a look at that avenue when we've already actioned, and have retainer agreements with legal counsel, so we're moving forward,” said Cherkas.
Bearspaw First Nation did not respond to requests for comment before press time. In previous media statements, Bearspaw Chief Darcy Dixon emphasized the importance of addressing the $5 annuity, which has not been adjusted since 1877.
“We have not been a priority on getting discussions to lead to results. We’re not asking for a handout. Five dollars is not what it is in 1877 that it is today,” said Dixon in a Nov. 26 interview with the Outlook. “We’re asking what was promised at treaty.
“If you look at the treaty text, what it states is we’d be treated no different than any other treaty that was made across Canada and given at that time.”
Bearspaw’s legal counsel has argued that Canada’s failure to update the payment violates the spirit of Treaty 7 and shortchanges the treaty’s signatories, given the extensive resource development and economic activity on Treaty 7 lands over the last century.
“The $5 has not been increased since 1877 and back then $5 was enough for a family to get through the winter. That was intent. Today, $5 can’t buy you a Tim Hortons coffee and a breakfast sandwich,” he said. “The way Canada has treated this annuity payment, it’s really resolved to an empty shell of a promise that was and is an important promise,” Sonny Cochrane, co-managing partner of Winnipeg-based Cochrane Sinclair Law and legal representation for the lawsuit, told the Outlook in a Nov. 26 interview.
“On a scale of one to 10 for exploitative actions by the Canadian government, this is an 11. Canada’s neglect to adjust the $5 from 1877 is shameful and a disgrace when you consider how many billions and billions have been taken from Treaty 7 territory. … It’s intended to correct the historical wrong that has happened and continues to happen today.”
While Bearspaw moves forward with its legal claim, Chiniki and Goodstoney are focused on advancing their discussions at the negotiation table. They point to ongoing processes in Treaty 6 and Treaty 8 territories, where First Nations are settling annuity-related claims directly with Canada rather than through the courts.
For now, Chiniki and Goodstoney say their path remains clear.
“We want a resolution that’s timely and fair for our members,” said Robb. “Negotiations give us a better chance at that than litigation ever could.”
With Bearspaw seeking to rally support for its class action, and Chiniki and Goodstoney opting out, the future of Treaty 7 annuity adjustments may hinge on which route offers the most practical path forward.
