Dufour softens his speech on the Innu about the caribou, but does not apologize

The Minister of Forests, Wildlife and Parks, Pierre Dufour, reviewed Thursday morning his speech about the Innu and the protection of caribou, without however going so far as to withdraw his remarks from the day before, when he reproached them not to “assist” in the recovery of the endangered species.

“It is collectively that we will be able to solve this problem: the foresters, the government, the communities, everyone together. That’s how we’re gonna settle [ça] “said Mr. Dufour on his arrival in Parliament. He turned on his heels when reporters asked him if he regretted his remarks the day before.

On Wednesday, the minister attacked the Innus — of Nutashkuan, presumably — by declaring that they “do not help the population” of forest-dwelling caribou, which is in sharp decline. He contrasted government actions to protect the species with those of members of this community.

“On the other hand, if you have a community that goes away under the pretext of its charity to kill caribou in a herd that is threatened and vulnerable, I think that they are not helping the population either” , he said. He was probably referring to an investigation that was opened into the hunting this winter of 50 woodland caribou on the North Shore. According to The Journal of Montrealthe animals were slaughtered by the Innus of Nutashkuan.

His declaration created a cascade of reactions: among the Aboriginal peoples, in the opposition parties and at Greenpeace. “Insinuating that indigenous communities are the cause of the caribou’s decline is brazen, while the minister continues to dismiss their protection plans,” argued the environmental group in particular. “Before commenting, he should sit down with the Innu if he really wants to protect the caribou,” Nutashkuan Chief Réal Tettaut also told the To have to.

Lafrenière arrested by the chiefs

The Minister responsible for Indigenous Affairs, Ian Lafrenière, said he was arrested by Indigenous leaders after his colleague’s statement. “The chiefs who wrote to me, they needed more information. That’s what I did, I confirmed our will [de travailler collectivement à la protection du caribou] “, he said Thursday.

Mr. Lafrenière did not want to comment on Mr. Dufour’s remarks. “I will let him make his statements, we work together, there is no cold,” he nevertheless assured. He said he intended to meet “a community” – his cabinet did not want to specify which one – with his colleague Dufour “as of next week”.

“We agree that we have to get there together: foresters, vacationers, businesses: we all have a role to play in caribou preservation,” he insisted.

Minister Lafrenière also said he wondered about the slaughter of animals that allegedly took place in Nutashkuan. “For the hunt that happened there, I wasn’t there, I don’t have all the details, but am I wondering? The answer is yes,” he said.

The elected official also returned to the sequence of decisions of the government, strongly criticized in recent weeks for the non-respect of commitments in health, education and protection of young people.

“When we talk about relations with the First Nations, we start with a deficit — I will say it gently — of credibility. They have been waiting for things for 400 years, they have been promised things for 400 years,” he began. “I can’t come up with a promise that I’m going to deliver overnight, a miracle. It’s going to take time, that’s the agreement we have together. »

The mandate of the ministry reviewed?

At the same time, the Prime Minister’s Office confirmed Thursday that it is studying the possibility of splitting the Ministry of Forests, Wildlife and Parks, as first reported by Radio-Canada.

According to our information, the mandates associated with Parks and Wildlife would go to the Ministry of the Environment, while those associated with the Forest would come under Natural Resources.

The separation of mandates is “a scenario that we are studying”, attested the press attaché to the Prime Minister, Ewan Sauves. “But if we had to do it, it would be from the next term,” he added, specifying that no change was therefore envisaged between now and the October election.

To see in video


source site-44