In February 2001, Robert Nault, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development authorized Mr. Thomas Molloy to begin long-term processes to address issues of asserted Aboriginal rights and Treaty rights. The scope of Mr. Molloy’s mandate varies:

• In Nova Scotia, he is authorized to begin Framework Agreement negotiations in a tripartite process involving the Province of Nova Scotia and the Mi’kmaq; and
• In New Brunswick, Quebec and Prince Edward Island, he is authorized to begin exploratory discussions with the Mi’kmaq and Maliseet and interested provincial governments.

Mr. Molloy is also responsible for discussions "with Aboriginal and provincial partners on the possible creation of Treaty Commission(s) in the spirit of the Peace and Friendship Treaties and the continuing importance of the treaty relationship"

While a treaty commission would not necessarily be part of the long-term negotiation processes, Mr. Molloy has been tasked with discussing whether our Aboriginal and provincial partners see any benefits to the creation of a body or office that could provide a neutral forum to discuss important treaty issues and the treaty relationship.

There is no set format for the structure of function of a treaty commission. In general, they are arm’s length, neutral bodies that engage treaty groups and governments in activities that support and commemorate the significance and continuing importance of treaties and the treaty relationship. They are often involved in discussing and promoting treaties and the treaty-related issues with the private sector and general public. You can access The Office of the Treaty Commissioner as well as the British Columbia Treaty Commission directly by following this links.

From Canada’s experience with such Commissions to date, it is clear that the functions, mandate and structure of treaty commissions can be tailored to the specific needs of each of the principal parties. While there is a common theme of public education and information aimed at raising the general level of awareness of treaties, the BCTC and OTC have different roles with respect to the respective treaty processes. This is due in large part to the different environments in which the BCTC and the OTC operate.

While negotiation on treaty and aboriginal rights can be long, frustrating and difficult at times, it would be the Government of the Canada’s preference that a treaty commission focuses on the facilitation of discussions on treaty issues rather than the adjudication of disputes.

Leaving aside the questions of design and structure for the moment, the more fundamental question is whether any type of treaty commission is necessary or desirable on the east coast? This leads to other questions, such as:

• What would a Treaty Commission do;
• Could it be a useful tool in sorting out and explaining the complex issues surrounding the treaties and the treaty relation ship; and
• Would the credibility of work produced be increased if a non-party, neutral body played a role in certain aspects of the treaty relationship.

NBAPC held meeting throughout the province to collect the views and concerns of our members regarding the creation of a Treaty Commission. The following is a list of their concerns:

• We must first have a vision for where we want to be in the future before we move forward on any Treaty Commission(s).
• We want the Treaty Commission to benefit our needs and goals.
• We want to take the lead role or initiative to design and structure any possible Treaty Commission
• The Treaty Commission must be a neutral body, otherwise the integrity of the Commission and work outcomes will be compromised, making implementation less possible.
• Our Treaty Commission(s) must reflect the uniqueness of our territory and the Maritimes at large.
• The Treaty Commission must also reflect the uniqueness our Aboriginal Nations.
• Will the Treaty Commission be mandated to deal with the land question or will its only mandate be to deal facilitate issues related to Treaties?
• The Treaty Commission must accept participation/representation for off reserve concerns/issues.
• The Treaty Commission should have a mandate to arbitrate disputes.
• Off-Reserve Aboriginals want a Treaty Commission to hold compensation money in Trust.
• Many Off-Reserve Aboriginals do not receive On-reserve benefits, would the Commission be mandated to investigate grievances of Off-Reserve Aboriginals.
• Is there potential for Nation based negotiation, Mi’kmaq, Maliseet, and Passamaquoddy, or will current organizational structures (MAWIW, UNBI, NBAPC) negotiate?
• Will Federal governments fiduciary responsibility, continue after new Treaty arrangement/agreement?
• What are the benefits to negotiation as opposed to litigation. What are the cost of negotiation and do they out weigh court costs?
• What involvement will the non-aboriginal public have? Should they be involved?
• We want the UN to be involved in this process because of conflict of interest by the Federal and Provincial crown.
• We want the UN to monitor the Process, this is the only way we can be sure of a fair negotiation process.
• Treaty Commission should be mandated for funding the process, education, facilitation, arbitration, as will as a Trustee of compensation money.