IE10 and below are not supported.

Contact us for any help on browser support

You need to be signed in to add your comment.

Question 1:

11 months ago

What principles should guide the Government of Canada in the consideration and protection from unauthorized disclosure of confidential Indigenous knowledge in proposed project reviews and regulatory decisions?

comment
Reply notification settings
Submitting your comment
Cancel
  • SixtiesScoopGirl 3 months ago
    Further in terms of regulating confidential knowledge - first: in the consideration and protection- well that really relies upon and is incumbent upon the Govt, given that the context is such that the Govt is in possession of such knowledge - which is at risk of unauthorized disclosure, given the context of the survey question. Firstly, the collection and stewardship of such confidential knowledge by non-Indigenous party is at question, no? Why would the Govt have such confidential "data" wrt Indigenous knowledge- as in fact it would constitute data, no? how else would the government classify or store such confidential 'knowledge'. What constitutes the guardrails for any non-Indigenous party to adhere to - to protect such confidential Indigenous knowledge - when in fact that knowledge is confidential in the first place - and sacred amongst the Peoples who own that knowledge, practice it, endorse it - or actually - maybe that knowledge is not what others have taken and take liberty to define and transcribe for themselves, just because they can. The term 'Confidential' foremost, in your survey question, stands out - No? that term has explicit definition and severe assertion of protection inherent itself. Clearly. I think that there are no degrees of 'confidential' data or knowledge especially as it pertains to a culture or sacred doctrine of Peoples who have occupied "Canada" for thousands of years before 'first contact'. I propose that the term 'confidential' as it pertains to knowledge/data/record certainly in 2020 - that term, classification of data (knowledge, assets, recordings, storytelling, +++) is in fact the highest level of classification for protection, no? Further - the parable term in requisite culture should be asserted respectfully - being that the inherent confidential knowledge is in fact distinct and so revered, for hundreds of years - and potentially by a Clan of territory pre-first contact and/or tribes or urban Indigenous well - basically all over the map of this land we now call Canada. if the govt of Canada somehow has a concern and ponderance about how to 'deal' with all that Confidential Indigenous Knowledge - maybe ask Indigenous leaders and citizens who really own that data - rather sacred practice and domain.
  • SixtiesScoopGirl 3 months ago
    Certainly rights as upheld by UN, no? Further, rights/declarations/codicils etc as it pertains to the TRC ruling and statute. The Govt of Canada should obviously have guiding and regulatory principles in place already - and certainly should form part of any policy or doctrine as it pertains to any form of disclosure of confidential Indigenous knowledge - in any form or forum of review or decision accord. No? its 2020. What accord or principles are in place, conversely, for same as it pertains to non -Indigenous knowledge - and what is in fact the knowledge-base/library of such confidential knowledge in possession of the Govt of Canada then? what constitutes the tangible assets, knowledge/content & practice wise then for such a solicited survey. I didn't see the term 'culture' in the question - hence why I did not proffer that very important term in turn for a parable example of marginalized peoples, lets say. in the case of Canada, Indigenous Peoples are in fact holders of first knowledge and lands on this continent for thousands of years before 'first contact', no? So who really owns the right to IP or governance to knowledge of a peoples here long long before - by thousands of years. And how is it that oversight and ruling over such aged and distinct knowledge can be 'packaged' and 'classified' as an asset for non-Indigenous citizens of this Land to decide the rules and parity of...by survey, absent of Indigenous oversight and sacred practice - which btw I think this whole question is about no? if truly important and resonant to the First Peoples but rather proffered by non-Indigenous parties then maybe publish this survey in just one - just one of our languages -and invest, respectfully with full accord for the taxonomy and cultural resonance of such culture, exchange and syllabus - I think has always ,pertained to a rich, spiritual and distinct Peoples - those who were here long before any misguided explorers, and long before any colonist rule - and we also survived such genocide 500 yrs later. Confidential Indigenous knowledge? Really - maybe release confidential records from the Residential School fiscal records then in turn - or the Sixties Scoop confidential financial and sg&a records within the Crown, CAS and Court Justice offices who signed all those pretty if not most vital forms as it pertains to human lives - also pretty confidential - very much so about singular living breathing human beings, citizens of Canada back then and if beating the odds as an Indigenous citizen of Canada, maybe still alive 40 to 50 years later. Maybe. Why not ask them, those 60s scoop survivors for the principles - since the Government decided it could make the most important life choice - and most confidential and intimate choice for them and still withhold those confidential knowledge records 50 years later - for those Indigenous children -and they did this without positing an online survey first to see if it was all okay. Release confidential Indigenous Survivor Identity records in tandem then, in the spirit of openness and transparency - append policy consideration wrt this call-out for action respectfully.
  • S Hill 9 months ago
    Indigenous Knowledge must be recognized as special and unique as it is specific to any area or region in Canada where a development may occur. It must also be recognized that IK is tied to the Self-Governance of any Indigenous Peoples whether it is recognized by the Colonial Governments of Canada or not. As such, the use and utilization of IK needs to be tied to the empowerment of the Indigenous Peoples affected through agreements or processes at the highest levels, such as Order in Councils or Parliamentary processes/recognition. The assessment process must not "mine" IK for use or application in an assessment process. Mining IK would be contrary to a respectful recognition of the Sovereign and Self-Governing nature of an Indigenous Peoples. The Indigenous Peoples affected must be in control of the research process, be independent of Government and company entities, and must be resourced and funded appropriately in order to carry out their research and participate in the process(es) in a substantive, significant and meaningful way. The OCAP principals must at a minimum apply to the IK research: Ownership, Control, Access and Possession. The Indigenous Group must be assisted to develop their capacity to establish, manage and continually develop their IK beyond the project life and process to further assist them with their Governance. If there is opportunity, IK must be legally recognized and established in agreement with the Indigenous Peoples affected, in a scale and scope desired by the group, in recognition of the special and unique nature of their IK.
  • H Green 10 months ago
    implement the normal legal protections that are available. there must be a way to protect by way of copyright and/or trademark any indigenous knowledge/information provided.
  • Denis Desrosiers 10 months ago
    Removed by moderator.