1 2 3 IPPERWASH PUBLIC INQUIRY 4 5 6 7 ******************** 8 9 10 BEFORE: THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE SIDNEY LINDEN, 11 COMMISSIONER 12 13 14 15 16 Held at: Forest Community Centre 17 Kimball Hall 18 Forest, Ontario 19 20 21 ******************** 22 23 24 March 31st, 2005 25

2
  1                        Appearances
  2  Derry Millar      )             Commission Counsel
  3  Susan Vella        )
  4  Donald Worme, Q. C )
  5  Katherine Hensel  )
  6  Jodi-Lynn Waddilove )   
  7  
  8  Murray Klippenstein )            The Estate of Dudley 
  9  Vilko Zbogar       )   (np)     George and George
 10  Andrew Orkin       )            Family Group
 11  Basil Alexander    )            Student-at-Law
 12  
 13  Peter Rosenthal  )              Aazhoodena and George
 14  Jackie Esmonde   )              Family Group
 15  
 16  Anthony Ross     )              Residents of 
 17  Kevin Scullion   )              Aazhoodena  (Army Camp)
 18  William Henderson )              Kettle Point & Stony
 19  Jonathon George  )   (np)       Point First Nation
 20  
 21  Kim Twohig       )   (np)       Government of Ontario
 22  Walter Myrka     )
 23  Sue Freeborn     )   (np)
 24  Maureen Smith    )   (np)
 25  Lynette D'Souza  )    (np)

3
  1                   APPEARANCES (cont'd)
  2  Janet Clermont   )              Municipality of 
  3  David Nash       )   (np)       Lambton Shores
  4  
  5  Peter Downard    )              The Honourable Michael
  6  Bill Hourigan    )   (np)       Harris
  7  Jennifer McAleer )
  8  
  9  Ian Smith        )   (Np)       Robert Runciman
 10  Alice Mrozek     )   (np)
 11  Harvey Stosberg  )   (np)       Charles Harnick
 12  Jacqueline Horvat )   (np)
 13  Douglas Sulman, Q.C. )           Marcel Beaubien
 14  Trevor Hinnegan     ) (np)
 15  
 16  Mark Sandler       ) (np)       Ontario Provincial 
 17  Andrea Tuck-Jackson )            Ontario Provincial Police
 18  Leslie Kaufman     )  (np)
 19  
 20  Ian Roland       )   (np)       Ontario Provincial 
 21  Karen Jones      )              Police Association &
 22  Debra Newell     )   (np)       K. Deane
 23  Ian McGilp       )   (np)
 24  Annie Leeks      )   (np)
 25

4
  1                   APPEARANCES (cont'd)
  2  
  3  Julian Falconer  )              Aboriginal Legal 
  4  Brian Eyolfson   )              Services of Toronto
  5  Julian Roy       )   (np)
  6  Clem Nabigon     )   (np)
  7  Adriel Weaver     )              Student-at-Law
  8  
  9  Al J.C. O'Marra  )   (np)       Office of the Chief
 10  Robert Ash, Q.C. )    (np)       Coroner
 11  
 12  William Horton   )              Chiefs of Ontario
 13  Matthew Horner   )
 14  Kathleen Lickers )   (Np)
 15  
 16  Mark Frederick   )   (np)       Christopher Hodgson
 17  Craig Mills      )   (np)
 18  Megan Mackey      )
 19  
 20  David Roebuck    )   (Np)       Debbie Hutton
 21  Anna Perschy     )   (np)
 22  Melissa Panjer   )   (np)
 23  Danya Cohen-Nehemia )
 24  
 25

1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 Page 3 Exhibits 6 4 5 GORDON BURTON PETERS, Resumed 6 Cross-Examination by Mr. Murray Klippenstein 7 7 Cross-Examination by Ms. Jackie Esmonde 24 8 Cross-Examination by Mr. Anthony Ross 35 9 Cross-Examination by Mr. William Henderson 45 10 Cross-Examination by Mr. Brian Eyolfson 55 11 Cross-Examination by Mr. Walter Myrka 59 12 Cross-Examination by Ms. Andrea Tuck-Jackson 75 13 Cross-Examination by Ms. Karen Jones 109 14 Cross-Examination by Mr. Peter Downard 127 15 Cross-Examination by Mr. Douglas Sulman 175 16 Cross-Examination by Mr. Matthew Horner 180 17 Re-Direct-Examination by Ms. Susan Vella 186 18 19 OVIDE WILLIAM MERCREDI, Sworn 20 Examination-in-chief by Mr. Donald Worme 197 21 22 Certificate of Transcript 277 23 24 25

1 EXHIBITS 2 No. Description Page 3 P-302 Document 1010587, September 26/'95 4 Minister's note from Ron Vrancart, Deputy 5 Minister, Natural Resources re: 6 Occupation of Ipperwash Provincial Park 21 7 P-303 Document 1011557 July 10/'95 Ontario 8 Native Affairs Secretariat Briefing note 9 for the Honourable Charles Harnick, 10 Minister responsible for Native Affairs 152 11 P-304 Document 1001680 September 08/'95 draft 12 transcript-conference call with First 13 Nations leaders. 162 14 P-305 Document 100908 September 12/'95 Statement 15 by Premier Harris. 164 16 P-306 Document 2001618 September 08/'95 CFRB 17 A.M. Toronto Radio News 6:00 p.m. 18 interview with Gord Peters 175 19 P-307 Document 14000065 179 20 P-308 Document 1003570 September 18/'95 draft 21 update Ipperwash from the Ministry of 22 the Attorney General 188 23 P-309 CD Rom and transcript of telephone call 24 between Ovide Mercredi and mark Wright 25 O.P.P. September 06/'95, 23/31/18 260

1 --- Upon commencing at 9:00 a.m. 2 3 THE REGISTRAR: This Public Inquiry is 4 now in session. The Honourable Mr. Justice Linden 5 presiding. Please be seated. 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Good 7 morning. Mr. Klippenstein, I think you're first up. 8 9 GORDON BURTON PETERS, Resumed 10 11 MR. MURRAY KLIPPENSTEIN: Good morning, 12 Commissioner. 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Good 14 morning. 15 MR. MURRAY KLIPPENSTEIN: Good morning, 16 Mr. Peters. 17 THE WITNESS: Good morning. 18 19 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. MURRAY KLIPPENSTEIN. 20 Q: I would like to ask you if you could 21 possibly elaborate on a comment you made in your 22 testimony yesterday about an injunction that the 23 Provincial Government was apparently working on. 24 Yesterday you mentioned that right after 25 the shooting of Dudley George, when you became involved,

1 you became aware of the Province's court action towards 2 obtaining an injunction and with respect to the 3 protesters in the Park; is that -- is that right? 4 A: That's correct. 5 Q: I believe you then commented on a 6 sense that you apparently felt that there was an 7 intention with respect to the injunction that it would be 8 enforced against the protesters in the Park. Is -- is 9 that what you said and -- and can you comment on that? 10 A: Yeah. I said -- I was talking about 11 people that were inside the barracks and I said yesterday 12 that there was great concern amongst them that -- that 13 the OPP were going to come in again; that once they had 14 been able to get an injunction that they were going to 15 enforce the injunction. 16 Q: And is that something you had a sense 17 of -- from beyond the occupiers as well? You mentioned 18 that you had had discussion with Mr. McCabe (phonetic), I 19 believe, who was a lawyer for the Province; is that 20 right? 21 A: Yes, I did. And -- and it became 22 such an issue with people that I wanted to verify that -- 23 that the -- the process that was going to be engaged in 24 by the Ontario Government, it was understood that there 25 was no injunction for the -- for the action that was

1 taken and that an injunction was -- was going to be filed 2 with the court the following morning. 3 I did -- I did, by virtue of that, call 4 ONAS offices, get a -- get a home telephone number for 5 Mr. McCabe and I subsequently called Mr. McCabe at home 6 and he apprised me of the -- of the process of the 7 injunction. 8 Q: Can you remember anything either 9 specifically or generally in terms of the information 10 that he provided to you or the impression you had after 11 that phone conversation? 12 A: The impression that I got from Mr. 13 McCabe was that this was a formality that they were going 14 through and that -- I believe, if I remember correctly, 15 he tried to assure me that -- that the police were not 16 going to take any further action but he also had a 17 responsibility to uphold the law and order, and -- and 18 that they were going to continue their -- their watch 19 over the -- over the area. 20 Q: And this was after the shooting of 21 Dudley? 22 A: Yes, it was. It was late in the 23 afternoon. 24 Q: Okay. 25 A: I think maybe around 5:00 or six

1 o'clock, maybe even later. 2 Q: Okay. I then would like to ask you 3 some questions related to treaties. And is it fair to 4 say that, based on your experience as something like 5 eleven (11) years as the Elected Senior Chief for the 6 Ontario Region and your work on the Executive of the 7 Chiefs of Ontario before that and your other work, that 8 you have a fairly wide experience with treaties in 9 Ontario and beyond; would that be fair? 10 A: Yes. 11 Q: I'd like to just very quickly 12 summarize to you a couple of points about the situation 13 here at Ipperwash that have come out in evidence and then 14 ask you about that. 15 The evidence so far in the Inquiry here is 16 that there was a treaty in 1828 between the Chippewa 17 Nation of this area and the Crown; and that, in that 18 treaty, a more or less square-shaped area of an original 19 reserve on the shore of Lake Huron was promised to the 20 Chippewa in perpetuity as part of the treaty; and that 21 that original reserve, at least the Stoney Point Reserve, 22 included what later became the Army Base and what later 23 became the -- the Provincial Park; and that in 1928 there 24 was a -- a surrender of lands of those original reserve 25 lands that became the Provincial Park, among other

1 things. 2 And the evidence has also been that -- 3 that Dudley was shot while demonstrating on the Park 4 lands that were part of those original treaty reserve 5 lands. Now I believe that's a fair statement of the 6 evidence or at least part of the evidence heard so far. 7 Now, is that evidence compatible with your 8 own knowledge of the circumstances in this area, not that 9 you would know that all but it -- is there any conflict 10 between what -- 11 A: In -- in general, in -- in a general 12 -- in my general understanding, yes. 13 Q: Yeah? 14 A: That's -- 15 Q: Okay. 16 A: -- that's compatible. 17 Q: And in terms of your broader work 18 over the many years in Ontario and -- and elsewhere, 19 would you agree that -- would you agree with me that the 20 treaties in general and treaty land promises by the Crown 21 are usually considered very, very important in Native 22 communities in Ontario and -- and the rest of Canada; is 23 that fair? 24 A: Yes, absolutely correct. 25 Q: Now, you were serving, as I

1 understand from your evidence, on the Executive for the 2 Chiefs of Ontario in 1982, when the Canadian Constitution 3 was amended so as to give specific special constitutional 4 protection to -- to treaty rights of First Nations 5 people. 6 Is that -- is that what you were doing in 7 1982? 8 A: Yes. 9 Q: And am I correct in recalling that 10 there was a very major campaign and effort by First 11 Nations people and communities and leaders across Canada 12 at that time to -- to push for an amendment to the 13 Constitution so that those treaty rights would actually 14 be recognized at that level; is that right? 15 A: That's correct. 16 Q: And did you participate in some way 17 in that campaign at that time? 18 A: Yes, I did. 19 Q: And as a result of that campaign, 20 treaty rights became recognized in the Constitution of 21 Canada in Section 35, is that right? 22 A: Yeah, there were two (2) processes. 23 The first round was they were recognizing Section 34, 24 they were -- that section was removed with negotiations 25 with the Federal Government, Alberta, and Ontario and

1 subsequently based on the activity by numerous people 2 including First Nations, Section 5 was -- was reinserted 3 into the Constitution. 4 Q: Section 35? 5 A: Section 35, yes. 6 Q: So, it was quite a -- quite a battle 7 by First Nations communities to -- to have that finally 8 accomplished; is that fair? 9 A: Absolutely, yes. 10 Q: Now, in this Inquiry we've heard a 11 lot about what happened at the Park. We've not actually 12 heard any evidence that Dudley George talked about 13 Section 35 of the Constitution or Constitutional 14 protection of treaty rights. And we've not actually 15 heard evidence that I can recall that Dudley George 16 referred to the Ipperwash Park lands that he was 17 demonstrating about as specifically being treaty lands. 18 We have heard evidence that Dudley George 19 referred to the Provincial Park lands that he was 20 occupying as "our lands," to use his phrase. Is it fair 21 to say that it's a -- it's a common and a fundamental 22 belief in many First Nations communities that lands 23 guaranteed to them by treaties are "our lands," to use 24 Dudley's phrase? 25 A: Yes, both -- what people would

1 categorize as treaty lands and traditional land. 2 Q: Hmm hmm. And even though Dudley 3 George never talked, as far as we know from the evidence, 4 about Section 35 and the specifics of the treaty, when he 5 talked about the Ipperwash Park lands being "our land," 6 to use his phrase, is it fair to say that that would have 7 been solidly rooted in the concept of treaty rights, 8 whether he articulated it that way or not? 9 A: I would assume so. I would assume 10 that in the -- in the greater scale of things when people 11 were talking about our lands, they would have -- they 12 would have understood that process that there was some 13 connection to how reserves were set aside. There was 14 some connection to being able to deal with treaty lands 15 in general. 16 And I would also assume that he would 17 understand that there was a spiritual connection to the 18 land and a responsibility that indigenous people have 19 regarding the land. 20 Q: I'd like to ask you a few questions 21 in relation to the idea of the surrender that I mentioned 22 before briefly. I take it that you're familiar with the 23 concept of surrender of lands that were guaranteed by 24 treaty; is that correct? 25 A: Yes.

1 Q: Yeah. Now, if you could turn to your 2 document binder, and Tab 36, which is a document dated 3 September 26th, 1995 and headed as a Minister's Note. I 4 believe it's Inquiry Document 1010587 -- 1010587. 5 Do you have that? 6 A: Yes. 7 Q: Now, this appears to be -- and so I 8 anticipate the evidence will be that this is a note from 9 the Deputy Minister of Natural Resources, Ron Vrancart, 10 to the then Minister of Natural Resources, and the issue 11 identified is the occupation of Ipperwash Provincial 12 Park. 13 And if I could just direct your attention 14 to paragraph number 4 and 5 which aren't numbered but 15 paragraph 4 begins, "Ontario still views." 16 Do you have that? 17 A: Yes, I do. 18 Q: And I just want to read those two (2) 19 short paragraphs, quote: 20 "Ontario still views the occupation of 21 the Ipperwash Provincial Park as an act 22 of illegal trespass. On behalf of the 23 people of Ontario, the Province has a 24 clear title to the one hundred and nine 25 (109) acre property that the Park sits

1 on. 2 This land was surrendered by 3 Aboriginals to the Federal Government 4 in 1928 and sold to private third party 5 owners in 1929. Ontario purchased this 6 property and followed all the legal 7 requirements to obtain title in the mid 8 1930's." 9 End of quote. Was it fair to say, based 10 on this, that it appears that the -- that the surrender 11 in 1928 appeared to play some significant role in the 12 thinking of the Provincial Government in around September 13 of '95? 14 A: Yes. 15 Q: Now I would like to again just point 16 out to you a couple of -- of bits of evidence that have 17 been put forward to the Inquiry and I would like to ask 18 whether you, from your experience, can comment on that. 19 Is it fair to say, first of all, that in 20 your years of various positions of leadership in Ontario, 21 you came across the idea and the reality and instances of 22 surrender of Treaty lands; did you come across that and 23 deal with it a fair bit? 24 A: Yes, we have. 25 Q: Now in -- in this particular

1 situation in this Inquiry we've heard evidence that 2 during the time period of the alleged 1928 surrender of 3 lands that became the Ipperwash Park, there was often 4 intense pressure from Indian agents to surrender Treaty 5 lands. 6 And that at that time it was part of 7 official Federal Government policy to assimilate Indians 8 so that they disappeared. And the -- the evidence has 9 also been put forward in this Inquiry that it was very 10 difficult for any First Nation at that time to 11 successfully resist pressure to surrender Treaty lands. 12 Can you comment at all from your 13 experience and knowledge on the extent to which that's in 14 accordance with your understanding? 15 A: I said yesterday from 1867 at the 16 time of Confederation until 1951, the Federal Government 17 became sole trustees for First Nations across -- across 18 the country. I also indicated by that process they 19 installed Indian agents into the community who ran the 20 total affairs of the community. 21 Also during that period of time, it was -- 22 it was illegal for indigenous people to practice their 23 customs and ceremonies. It was illegal for them to be 24 able to meet and to talk about the future of their -- of 25 their -- of their communities and they also didn't have

1 access to legal counsel during that period of time. 2 And there were many what I would probably 3 term "sweetheart deals" that were conducted between the 4 Federal Government, some of its corporations, the 5 churches were involved in -- in accessing lands, leases 6 were struck for ninety-nine (99) years and a dollar ($1) 7 a year with renewals. 8 There was a lot of activity and as a 9 result of that process that the government undertook 10 because it was an assimilation problem and their main 11 focus was how to deal with the Indian problem in Canada. 12 Many lands were alienated and I said 13 yesterday, the Royal Commission said about 75 percent 14 indigenous lands were removed. 15 Q: In your testimony yesterday you also 16 said that after the shooting of Dudley George in some of 17 your conversations with, and I think you mentioned the 18 Federal Government, you suggested to them at some point 19 that part of the solution was that the Federal Government 20 should buy back the Provincial Park lands from the 21 Province and restore them to the First Nation people; is 22 that fair? 23 A: Yes; that is -- that is fair. 24 Q: Now you also mentioned, I think, that 25 in some situations of First Nations people you've seen

1 the Federal Government, when it doesn't want to deal with 2 an issue, say that's provincial jurisdiction and the 3 Province, when it doesn't want to deal with something, 4 say that's federal jurisdiction. 5 Is that roughly what you were talking 6 about? 7 A: Yes, it was. 8 Q: And is it fair to say that sometimes, 9 because of that -- that division of jurisdiction, it is 10 harder for First Nations people to get their problem 11 solved in a what would otherwise be considered a fair or 12 practical way? 13 A: Yes, it is. In fact, I can refer you 14 to a statement made by one (1) of the Premiers who said 15 their goal as -- as Premier of the province of Ontario 16 was to end the game of -- I think he referred to it as 17 Gaston and -- and Alphonse -- 18 Q: Oh, yes. 19 A: -- in a game of Ping-Pong, so. 20 Q: A number -- a number of witnesses in 21 this inquiry have agreed with the suggestion that part of 22 the solution or part of a -- of the steps forward for the 23 situation at Ipperwash is that the Province give up 24 whatever claim it might have to the Ipperwash parklands 25 and return them to -- to Native people; does that sound

1 like a -- a fair and -- and sensible thing to do? 2 A: It's what I recommended to the 3 Province on several occasions. 4 Q: If -- if you could turn to your -- 5 your document book again, at Tab 42. Do you have Tab 42? 6 A: Yes, I have. 7 Q: That is -- I apologize, Commissioner, 8 I realize I forgot to request an exhibit number for the 9 previous document I referred to, the briefing note of 10 September, and I wonder if I could have a -- an exhibit 11 number for that. 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That was Tab 13 26? Was that the one (1) we were just talking about? 14 THE REGISTRAR: Tab 36. 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'm sorry. 16 MR. MURRAY KLIPPENSTEIN: Tab 36 being -- 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Tab 36. 18 MR. MURRAY KLIPPENSTEIN: -- being a 19 minister's note dated September 26, 1995, document 20 1010587. 21 THE REGISTRAR: P-302, Your Honour. 22 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: P-302. 23 MR. MURRAY KLIPPENSTEIN: I apologize for 24 that confusion. 25

1 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-302: Document 1010587, September 2 26/'95 Minister's note from 3 Ron Vrancart, Deputy 4 Minister, Natural Resources 5 re: Occupation of Ipperwash 6 Provincial Park 7 8 CONTINUED BY MR. MURRAY KLIPPENSTEIN: 9 Q: Then going back to Tab 42, which is a 10 document entitled, "Minutes of the Support Group, 11 Occupation of Ipperwash Provincial Park" -- appear to be 12 some typing errors there -- and it's Inquiry Document 13 Number 1012118. I anticipate this will be introduced as 14 minutes, apparently not approved yet, of -- of a meeting 15 of November 15th, 1995, discussing the occupation of 16 Ipperwash Park. 17 And I wonder if you could turn to the 18 second page, under the heading, "B - Responses," and the 19 second bullet point under that, I'd just like to read, 20 quote: 21 "ONAS (John Van West) (phonetic) 22 pointed out that the fact that the 23 Federal Government was willing to 24 relinquish land that was surrendered, 25 re: the private land that was added to

1 the Army Base, puts pressure on the 2 Province to consider relinquishing its 3 legal title to the Park to the Stoney 4 Pointers." 5 Now, we don't know exactly what the 6 discussion of that was until the evidence but would you 7 agree with me that this appears to be referring to the 8 concept that you've just talked about, which is the 9 Province waiving its claim to the Park and returning it 10 to Native people? 11 A: Yes. 12 Q: Now, the other thing that could be 13 noted about this comment, it says -- talks about the 14 return of the Park, quote, "To the Stoney Pointers," 15 close quote. Now, it's not secret that the question of 16 who should control or occupy or have possession of the 17 original Stoney Point Reserve is a matter of some intense 18 difference of opinion in the community or communities 19 around here. 20 Would you agree with me that returning the 21 Ipperwash Park lands to Native people would be a step 22 forward, even if it was done through a mechanism that 23 didn't specify exactly which group would be the final 24 recipients? 25 A: I think it would be a step forward.

1 Q: There's been some discussion in this 2 Inquiry and -- and for years about the pain and discord 3 that's been caused in the community here and about 4 healing that. 5 Would you agree with me that return of the 6 Stoney Point treaty lands might be an important part of 7 healing? 8 A: Probably an element of that process. 9 Q: And would you agree with me that 10 attempting to heal some of the -- the pain and the wounds 11 in this area without returning the treaty lands, doesn't 12 have as likely a chance of good results? 13 A: I think it would always be an 14 outstanding issue if it's not dealt with. 15 Q: Would you agree with me that if the 16 outcome of the shooting of Dudley George at Ipperwash 17 Provincial Park is that the Provincial Government says to 18 native people at Ipperwash, You folks do some healing, we 19 keep the land; that is not likely to be -- to be either 20 fair or effective? 21 A: No. 22 Q: You'd agree with that? 23 A: I'd agree with that, yes. 24 Q: Thank you, Mr. Peters, I have no 25 further questions. Thank you, Commissioner.

1 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you, 2 Mr. Klippenstein. 3 Yes, Ms. Esmonde...? 4 5 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. JACKIE ESMONDE: 6 Q: Good morning, Mr. Peters. 7 A: Good morning. 8 Q: My name is Jackie Esmonde, I'm one 9 (1) of the lawyers representing the Aazhoodena and George 10 Family Group. I just have a few questions for you this 11 morning. 12 Now, you've been very clear in your 13 evidence, particularly yesterday, that there should be a 14 political response and a political solution when there 15 are disputes over land claims. 16 A: Yes. 17 Q: That such disputes should not be 18 treated as a policing matter? 19 A: Absolutely. 20 Q: And you, in fact, spent considerable 21 energies in the days and weeks following the shooting 22 trying to assist in achieving a political solution to the 23 dispute? 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: Now, we looked yesterday at a letter

1 that you wrote to Ron Irwin, which is at Tab 11 of your 2 book. It's Inquiry Document 1009017, Exhibit 297 and 3 there's just -- I wanted to ask you a few questions about 4 the first paragraph of that letter. It states: 5 "Dear Mr. Irwin, 6 I am hereby requesting your immediate 7 involvement in the Ipperwash situation. 8 Some form of senior Canadian political 9 involvement is required. So far, 10 Premier Mike Harris has shirked his 11 responsibility even though I believe 12 his government's anti-native policies 13 are at least partly responsible for 14 what has happened." 15 Now, first of all, you would agree with me 16 then, you viewed Premier Mike Harris' government as being 17 anti-native? 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: And it was hostile to First Nations 20 issues and First Nations rights? 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: And would you agree with me that the 23 Mike Harris government had taken what could be called a 24 "get tough" approach to native issues? 25 A: It was based on their -- their

1 ideology that -- that everybody in the province was equal 2 and everybody should be treated equally and so what that 3 doesn't do is, it doesn't take into account any treaty 4 relationship, it doesn't take into account that -- that 5 there are jurisdictions that are exercised by indigenous 6 people. 7 Q: So, the Mike Harris government took 8 this approach not just with the Ipperwash situation, but 9 will all issues that arose during his government's tenure 10 with respect to First Nations issues? 11 A: That's correct. Well, I shouldn't 12 say through the entire tenure because I only know -- I 13 only know about the few years that I was there. 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Excuse me, 15 just hold up, Mr. Peters. Just one (1) second. 16 Yes, Mr. Downard? 17 MR. PETER DOWNARD: Sir, yesterday you 18 stated the -- the importance of which I think we're all 19 aware of keeping a -- a focus on the mandate of this 20 Inquiry. 21 And this last question raises a great deal 22 of issues which we can address but which are well beyond 23 the scope of the Inquiry, in my respected submission. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I don't 25 think you're going to go any further.

1 MS. JACKIE ESMONDE: No, I -- I wasn't 2 intending to go further than that. 3 MR. WILLIAM HORTON: Mr. Commissioner, I 4 recognize that there's no further question, but I do want 5 to record in case it does come up again, and it may well 6 come up again, that I don't agree with the position that 7 Mr. Downard has just stated. 8 And this is part -- partly attributable to 9 the fact that we have to hear evidence in sequence. And 10 we may not have heard the evidence that forms the 11 foundation for this question yet. But we know, in the 12 documentary record, that it is coming. 13 That we will hear evidence that either Mr. 14 Harris himself or members of his government tried to 15 justify what was being done here on the basis that people 16 were being treated equally. 17 And the position that we're going to take 18 and I believe this witness has already stated, is that 19 that is merely a code for disregarding the -- the legal 20 rights, the Treaty rights of First Nations people. 21 And that it is actually not an equal 22 treatment at all but actually a racist policy in its 23 effect. And that is at the very heart of what this 24 Inquiry is about from our perspective. 25 So while there may be no further questions

1 at this point, the issue about the Harris government 2 cloaking its policy with respect to First Nations under 3 the guise of equal treatment is very much at the heart of 4 all this. 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, we'll 6 deal with that when we come to it. 7 Yes, Ms. Esmonde, you want to continue 8 with your cross-examination? 9 10 CONTINUED BY MS. JACKIE ESMONDE. 11 Q: Now you had a great deal of experience 12 during your time as the Regional Chief with several 13 different Provincial Governments, and you listed them 14 yesterday; that's right? 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: And you saw a number of different -- 17 I think -- I believe you saw every different political 18 party in power during that time. 19 A: Yes, I have. 20 Q: Now would you agree with me that one 21 (1) of the barriers that you found to reaching a 22 political solution to the dispute at Ipperwash was the 23 hardline stance being taken by the Provincial Government 24 of the time? 25 A: Yes, it was.

1 Q: And would you agree that the 2 Conservative Government led by Premier Harris was in fact 3 one (1) of the most difficult governments that you had to 4 work with in your capacity as Regional Chief? 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, Mr. 6 Downard. 7 MR. PETER DOWNARD: It's the same 8 objection, Commissioner. The -- the public record's very 9 clear that in September 1995 this government, the first 10 of two (2) governments had only been in office for two 11 (2) months. 12 And My -- My Friend is seeking to illicit 13 sweeping statements about the regime. We're hearing 14 calls -- the regime's being labelled a racist regime by 15 My Friend, Mr. Horton which is very offensive. 16 And we are getting into a very wide area 17 and it has nothing to do -- and with my respectful 18 submission to approach so broadly the terms of reference 19 of this Inquiry. 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, Ms. 21 Esmonde? You -- 22 MS. JACKIE ESMONDE: Well, I mean I would 23 strongly disagree with that statement. I -- I've asked 24 this witness to comment on his experience with -- he's 25 had experience with a variety of different governments.

1 And I'm asking about his experience with respect to the 2 Ipperwash dispute and the difficulty he had in reaching a 3 political solution to that crisis. 4 I -- I don't think it's a broad sweeping 5 statement of '95. 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: In 1995. 7 You're referring to the specific -- 8 MS. JACKIE ESMONDE: Yes. 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- time 10 right after -- let's try and take it one (1) step at a 11 time. 12 MR. PETER DOWNWARD: Yes. I -- I did not 13 hear that question as being any way confined to the 14 relevant time frame. 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, I 16 understand your objection and we do have to try to remain 17 focussed but I expect at some point we're going to have a 18 broader discussion of this issue. But for the time being 19 try to keep your questions as focussed as you can, 20 because I think you can. 21 I don't think you're trying to -- 22 MS. JACKIE ESMONDE: I was -- I believe 23 that my question was very clearly focussed on the 24 Ipperwash crisis. 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Let's try

1 to. Let's cross that bridge when we come to it. 2 THE WITNESS: Do you want me to respond 3 to that question or is that off the table or -- 4 5 CONTINUED BY MS. JACKIE ESMONDE. 6 Q: No, I would ask that you please do 7 respond to it. Do you -- do you need me to repeat the 8 question for you or do? 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Do you want 10 to repeat the question and try to be as focussed as you 11 can be at the moment? 12 13 CONTINUED BY MS. JACKIE ESMONDE. 14 Q: Would you agree with me that in your 15 experience in trying to find a solution to the Ipperwash 16 crisis that the Conservative Government as led by Premier 17 Harris was one (1) of the most difficult governments that 18 you had to work with in your capacity as the Regional 19 Chief? 20 A: Yes. We've had, with -- with 21 successive governments that have come in to power in 22 Ontario, we have generally had forums, places to be able 23 to talk, we've had meetings with the Premier, we've had 24 meetings with Cabinet, we try to establish close access 25 for working relationships. And -- and in my short time

1 with the Harris government, we were unable to achieve 2 that. 3 We did start to talk about a relationship 4 because the previous relationship which we established 5 with the NDP, called the Statement of Political 6 Relationships, was not something that was being put on 7 the table. They said that -- to us that it had not been 8 rescinded, but yet, in practice, it wasn't being dealt 9 with. And, at the same time, they were trying to sort 10 out another way of being able to deal with -- with issues 11 that arose. 12 Q: Now, in your evidence yesterday you 13 referred to the -- to the fact that, I believe it was the 14 portfolio for dealing with First Nations issues had -- 15 had changed during the Harris Government and it was the 16 Attorney General that was now responsible for those 17 issues; is that -- is that correct? 18 A: That's correct. 19 Q: And you had suggested that that 20 signalled a policy change by the government? 21 A: Yeah. In -- in our opinion at the 22 time, we saw that as a change of -- of venue. We seen it 23 going from -- from being a place with a minister that had 24 a portfolio for that area and was attached to MNR or 25 might have been attached to ONAS. We seen that as a

1 direct change because we seen that as an enforcement of 2 provincial law, and that anybody that followed that -- 3 that responsibility would be tied directly to the AG's 4 office. 5 Q: So you saw that as a change in that 6 the government would treat First Nations issues as a law 7 and order issue rather than a natural resources and 8 regulation issue; is that correct? 9 A: Yes. We saw it more as a legal 10 process. 11 Q: I see. Now, in your letter to Ron 12 Irwin that I have referred you to, you say that: 13 "Premier Harris's anti-Native policies 14 are at least partly responsible for 15 what has happened." 16 And I just wanted to ask you what you 17 meant by that? 18 A: Well, I think the -- the notion that 19 we've talked about, about the equality process is one (1) 20 of them. And by evidence that we seen in the early 21 goings, there was a -- there was a process that was 22 established by the Treaty weigh in group about harvesting 23 that was cancelled upon the arrival of the -- of the 24 Conservative Government. 25 Our inability to be able to meet and to be

1 able to talk were some of those issues that we seen as 2 being not conforming with -- with past practices and -- 3 and it was labelled in those terms. 4 Q: You also told us yesterday that you 5 were involved in a number of meetings with the OPP in -- 6 in the days and weeks following the shooting? 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: And do you recall whether, during any 9 of those meetings, any reason was given for the OPP 10 marching on the Park at eleven o'clock at night on 11 September 6th? 12 A: There was never a reason that was 13 given to us. In fact, there was never a reason given to 14 us why the police felt it was necessary to use force or 15 it was necessary for as many officers to be there as was 16 there; why there was no mechanism to try to talk to other 17 people about what was going, why they -- why they raid 18 the place in the middle of the night; we never got a 19 response to those. 20 People continue to ask, especially Elders 21 who ask those questions on a very frequent basis. And it 22 was a very emotional process that we went through in 23 being able to have the kind of discussion about what 24 happened. 25 Q: So I understand from your evidence

1 that the proper response to First Nations disputes, as 2 we've gone over, is through negotiation with the various 3 levels of government? 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: And I take it you would agree with me 6 that it's in fact the failure of government -- 7 governments to address First Nations issues and rights 8 through negotiation that has left First Nations citizens 9 to take action, such as reclaiming their territory in the 10 first place? 11 A: Well -- well, yes, I would with that, 12 yeah, and I won't go any further than that. 13 Q: Did you want to comment further on 14 that? 15 A: No. 16 Q: Okay. Thank you very much, sir. 17 Those are all of my questions. Thank you. 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 19 I think you're up, Mr. Ross. 20 21 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. ANTHONY ROSS: 22 Q: Thank you, Mr. Commissioner. Good 23 morning, Chief Peters. 24 A: Good morning. 25 Q: Good running into you again. Mr.

1 Commissioner, I think I will be a little shorter in that 2 some of my areas have been touched by other people. 3 Chief Peters, prior to the 1993 occupation 4 at the range, I take it that you were aware that there 5 were concerns about the lands at Stoney Point? 6 A: Yes, I was. 7 Q: And in that regard, I don't want to 8 walk you through every page, would you agree with me that 9 most of the information in that letter which was just 10 referred to you by the last Counsel, Ms. Esmonde, your 11 letter to Ron Irwin September 8th, 1995, a lot of that 12 information could have been written to him in 1993; isn't 13 that correct? 14 A: Yes. 15 Q: So, this is a problem that had been 16 sitting around and festering for a long while, and until 17 somebody gets killed, the Federal Government does not 18 want to look at it. Is that a fair way to put it? 19 A: It's probably a fair way of being 20 able to look at it. 21 Q: Yeah, so that prior to 1993, the 22 problem was just brushed aside and ignored, correct? 23 A: I believe there were some 24 negotiations that took place -- 25 Q: Yeah.

1 A: -- prior to '93. 2 Q: This question is between 1942 -- 1945 3 the lands were to be returned and then up to 1993 the 4 lands were still not returned. 5 A: Yes, that's correct. 6 Q: And would you agree with me that 7 there's been a substantial flurry of paperwork after 8 September -- after the 6th of September, 1995 on the 9 Ipperwash matter? 10 A: I can't comment on that because I've 11 -- I've only seen parts of the distribution that have 12 taken place. I'm not -- I don't -- I don't see the 13 information that's sent directly to the Bands or -- 14 Q: Sure. 15 A: -- or anyone else. 16 Q: But even just the parts of the 17 information that you've seen is substantially more that 18 what was happening prior -- back in 1993. 19 A: Yes, that's correct. 20 Q: Or, indeed, 1994? 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: Yeah. So, what we do know is that 23 there's an outstanding grievance which the Federal 24 Government is aware of? 25 A: Yes.

1 Q: And the Provincial Government is 2 aware of? 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: And then just going back for a minute 5 to the so-called surrender -- sorry, the surrender back 6 in 1928 of the -- the -- the end of the beach lands at -- 7 at Stoney Point IR 43, everybody seems to think that the 8 purchasers got a very good deal when those lands were 9 sold. 10 Do you agree with that? The people who 11 acquired it pretty well got it for nothing. 12 A: Well, I guess that's a good deal if 13 you could get land for that -- for that -- 14 Q: Okay, fine. Is it -- am I to 15 understand that you're not acquainted with the financial 16 aspects of that surrender? 17 A: I was briefed on it at one (1) point, 18 but I'm not -- I'm not able to talk about it at this 19 point. 20 Q: But from the level of briefing, would 21 you say that it was a good deal for the purchasers and a 22 bad deal for the First Nation? 23 A: Yes. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes? 25 MS. SUSAN VELLA: I'm sorry, I'm a bit

1 slow on my feet there, but I thought that Chief Peters 2 just indicated that he didn't recall -- 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: He wasn't 4 familiar with -- 5 MS. SUSAN VELLA: -- the financial 6 circumstances and then to ask him to therefore comment as 7 to whether it was a good or bad deal, perhaps was 8 stretching it. 9 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: I do not accept that 10 objection, but we will go on. 11 12 CONTINUED BY MR. ANTHONY ROSS: 13 Q: So, Chief Peters, then after -- 14 between 1993 and -- and September 1995, the -- the 15 barracks were occupied. Did you know that the barracks 16 were occupied around the end of July 1995? 17 A: Yes, I did. 18 Q: And even then, a lot that is in your 19 letter to Minister Irwin would have been applicable? 20 A: Yes. 21 Q: But still nothing was done? 22 A: No. 23 Q: And everybody -- 24 A: Nothing -- nothing concrete. 25 Q: Nothing concrete?

1 A: Yeah. 2 Q: And then we've got the unfortunate 3 killing of Dudley George in September of 1995? 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: Yeah. Now, Ms. Esmonde asked you 6 about the relationship with the Provincial Government. 7 Now, is it fair to say that between 1993 and 1995 -- the 8 election in 1995 -- that your offices were -- was 9 developing a fairly good working relationship with the 10 government? 11 A: That's correct. 12 Q: And would you agree that the hard 13 line position, after the election in 1995, was really 14 consistent with the pre-election statements of the 15 government which came to power? 16 A: Yeah, we were concerned about the -- 17 the platform that was being espoused. 18 Q: And the -- the policies that were 19 followed after the election were, to a large degree, 20 consistent with what had been promised by the Tory 21 government? 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: Now, it appears to me, sir, that 24 between 1995 and now, there's been a lot of discussion 25 but no real action on the return of the lands; would you

1 agree with that? 2 A: Yes. 3 Q: Now, I take it from that, that the 4 dominant society has really failed to properly address 5 the problem so that failure to come to a solution is 6 really a natural consequence of how your problem is 7 approached; will you agree with that? 8 A: It's probable, you know? 9 Q: Yeah. Now, would you go further and 10 say that this is a First Nation type problem which 11 requires much more First Nation involvement? 12 A: Well I've -- I've always advocated 13 that First Nations had to be involved in developing all 14 kinds of solutions that impact our community, especially 15 our lands. 16 Q: Yeah. Now, just to complete 17 something on the record here, I would ask that Document 18 Number 9000028, which is Exhibit P-205, be shown to the 19 Witness. 20 A: Where are you at? 21 Q: No, it's -- 22 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: It'll be 23 shown. It'll be put on the screen and you'll get a copy 24 of it. 25

1 (BRIEF PAUSE) 2 3 CONTINUED BY MR. ANTHONY ROSS: 4 Q: What I'd like you to do, Chief 5 Peters, is if you'll refer to your -- your book of 6 documents under Tab 1 there is the draft working 7 agreement dated July 13, 1993; do you remember that 8 document? 9 A: Yes, I do. 10 Q: And I take it that your good officers 11 were, to a large degree, involved in getting that 12 document structured the way it is? 13 A: Yes. 14 Q: And then I refer you now to the 15 Exhibit P-205. 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Can you put 17 that on the screen, please? Are you putting it on? 18 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Well, we're trying. 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: You're 20 trying to get it? Okay, that's fine. 21 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Well, we're trying to 22 find the number, the Inquiry document number. 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: 900028's the 24 wrong number? 25 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Well, yeah, it doesn't

1 appear to be -- I'll find it. 2 3 (BRIEF PAUSE) 4 5 CONTINUED BY MR. ANTHONY ROSS: 6 Q: I will try to -- so, what we've got 7 here is the document that was prepared as a result of 8 some level of involvement at your offices, which is -- 9 and the document is dated July 13 -- it's July, no -- 10 July 13, 1993 and appears under Tab 1 in your book of 11 documents. 12 A: That's correct. 13 Q: Yes. And then we've got the Exhibit 14 P-205, which relates to a meeting on July the 22nd, 1993 15 and there's a list of the Stoney Point members who 16 attended that meeting in Toronto. 17 A: I'm searching for this -- 18 Q: No, the -- the list is Exhibit 205. 19 I think that's -- 20 A: I've got a letter. 21 Q: No, well you've got the wrong 22 document. Just hold for a minute please. 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: The document 24 you should have, I presume, corresponds to the one on the 25 screen. If it doesn't, you've got the wrong exhibit

1 number. 2 THE WITNESS: No, I don't have that 3 document. 4 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: Well, we'll get that. 5 Mr. Commissioner, the purpose for this is 6 just to clarify the number of meetings. There was a 7 question whether there was one (1) or two (2) and I think 8 this would be helpful to the witness. 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 10 11 CONTINUED BY MR. ANTHONY ROSS. 12 Q: Do you recall that meeting, Chief 13 Peters? 14 A: Yes, I do. 15 Q: So does this help you then as far as 16 the number of meetings? Number one, we had the first 17 meeting as a result of which the document which appears 18 under Tab 1 was created. 19 And then there was another meeting on July 20 the 22nd at your offices in Toronto and you've got the 21 list in your hand. 22 A: Yes. 23 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: Okay. Thank you very 24 much, Mr. Commissioner. 25 Thank you, Chief Peters, those are my

1 questions. 2 THE WITNESS: Thank you. 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you, 4 Mr. Ross. 5 Mr. Henderson...? 6 MR. WILLIAM HENDERSON: Thank you, 7 Commissioner. Good morning, Mr. Peters. 8 THE WITNESS: Good morning. 9 10 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. WILLIAM HENDERSON. 11 Q: I believe we've met before. I'm here 12 this morning representing the Chippewas of Kettle and 13 Stony Point First Nation. 14 You indicated that your community is the 15 Moravian of the Thames -- Moravian of the Thames? 16 A: Yes, it is. Yes. 17 Q: And as I understand it the Moravians 18 were actually a church group? 19 A: Yeah. Missionaries, yes. 20 Q: Moravian missionaries who spoke the 21 German language I believe. 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: And were active in Pennsylvania 24 historically in colonial times? 25 A: That's correct.

1 Q: And they organized several 2 communities including communities with the Delaware 3 Nation? 4 A: That's correct. 5 Q: And what happened in some of those 6 communities in Pennsylvania? And we're talking in the 7 1780's now. 8 A: Some of those communities were -- 9 were annihilated by troops. Some of those -- some of 10 those communities were -- were on the force march to 11 Oklahoma, some to Kansas, some -- some remained in Ohio, 12 some were in Michigan and two (2) groups that came north 13 that settled in -- in what is now Moravian and Muncey and 14 part of those groups settled in Six Nation. 15 MR. WILLIAM HENDERSON: Commissioner, you 16 indicated yesterday that you were interested in some of 17 the history in southwestern Ontario. This history is 18 rather unique. 19 You also heard similar history or heard 20 history of the -- how the Oneida settlement came to be in 21 southwestern Ontario. So I'm just touching on this 22 briefly. 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 24 Some of this is helpful. 25

1 CONTINUED BY MR. WILLIAM HENDERSON. 2 Q: And roughly in the early 1790's, the 3 Moravians were entitled to a license of occupation for 4 the Delaware settlement in -- is it Southhold (phonetic)? 5 No, not Southhold, but the township. 6 A: In -- 7 Q: Two (2) townships actually. 8 A: Orford (phonetic) and part of Orford 9 Township and well I guess it's all encompassed in Orford 10 Township, what's left of it. 11 Q: Right. We'll come to that in a 12 moment. As of 1812 the -- the settlement itself was 13 named Fairford? 14 A: Fairfield (phonetic). 15 Q: Fairfield, I'm sorry. Thank you for 16 the correction. And it was north of the Thames River? 17 A: Yes it was. The bulk of it was north 18 of the Thames River. 19 Q: And what happened to that community? 20 A: It was destroyed in the war of 1812. 21 Q: During the Battle of the Thames? 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: And that's the battle at which 24 Tecumseh was killed? 25 A: Yes.

1 Q: Okay. And what lands do the 2 Moravians have north of the Thames now? 3 A: We have none. 4 Q: None? And of the land south of the 5 Thames you said what's left; what happened to the bulk of 6 the land south of the Thames? 7 A: Well, it starts early. 8 Q: Yes. 9 A: You know, with the -- with the advent 10 of Talbot Road and actually that's how we ended up on the 11 north of the river. When Talbot Road was built by 12 Colonel Talbot, all lands were seized to build the first 13 road going Westward. 14 And so our access to lands that were -- 15 that were south of that which included the lakes, access 16 to Lake Erie, those were -- those were, by their 17 provisions, transferred to the north of the Thames River. 18 Q: So the result out of the original 19 grant less than half are -- are now the Moravians of the 20 Thames Reserve? 21 A: The original grant, I would probably 22 say that we'd be lucky to occupy 5 percent. 23 Q: And the existing reserve is about 24 four (4) square miles? 25 A: Yeah, it's about three thousand

1 (3,000) square acres. 2 Q: Three thousand (3,000) acres? 3 A: Yeah. 4 Q: Hmm hmm. So, it's slightly larger 5 than the Stoney Point Reserve would have been in its -- 6 as originally set aside by treaty -- a reserve from the 7 treaty. 8 A: Hmm hmm. 9 Q: How many people live at Moraviantown 10 now? 11 A: Total population is over a thousand. 12 About -- probably about four hundred and fifty (450) 13 people live in the community. 14 Q: On reserve, yes. 15 A: Yeah. 16 Q: Thank you. You talked -- I'm -- I'm 17 going take you to a document and I believe it's Exhibit 18 P-278. This is not a document you created, I hope you've 19 seen it. 20 21 (BRIEF PAUSE) 22 23 Q: I think if we scroll down there's a 24 reference to a conversation -- oh no, there it is right 25 there. If you see it about two-thirds (2/3) of the way

1 down, Mr. Elijah advised that he was no longer doing 2 local negotiations and that Gord Peters was; do you see 3 that reference there? 4 A: Hmm hmm. 5 Q: It's -- it's in the line: 6 "Calling -- calling from Toronto." 7 A: Okay. Yeah, I've got it. Yeah. 8 Q: Mr. Elijah testified with respect to 9 that document and he indicated that that was his 10 understanding even though, of course, this is somebody 11 else reporting a conversation with him. 12 Would you like to comment on whether or 13 not you saw yourself as a negotiator at Stoney Point 14 after -- this would be around November 29th, I believe? 15 A: I indicated yesterday that I never 16 ever viewed myself as a negotiator. I acted as a 17 liaison, I -- I acted as a go-between between groups. 18 The only time that I acted in a capacity 19 of negotiator when I was requested by the community to 20 work with the -- with the two (2) parties to try to find 21 arrangements. But I did act -- I did act as a part of a 22 group in negotiations with the police to bring down the 23 barriers, to be able to create the investigation, to 24 bring in the -- the Special Investigative Unit, but I 25 didn't see myself in -- in that sense as being a -- a

1 negotiator on behalf of Stoney Point or anybody else. 2 Q: Okay. I thought you might like the 3 opportunity to clarify that, since that's part of the 4 Commission's record. So, your -- your indication is that 5 you did not see yourself as a negotiator; did you 6 understand that anyone did see you in that role? 7 A: I didn't think so. I don't think 8 that people saw me in that role, because I -- I did go 9 back and forth and then as we started -- as we started to 10 be able to deal with some of the issues people from 11 Stoney Point were in the meetings themselves, being able 12 to address their own issues. 13 Q: Thank you. I wonder if Commission 14 Counsel could put Document Number 14000065 up on the 15 screen? Now, I don't have a printed copy of that to hand 16 you, but I think it will -- 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: 14000065? 18 MR. WILLIAM HENDERSON: Yes, 19 Commissioner, that's it there. 20 21 CONTINUED BY MR. WILLIAM HENDERSON: 22 Q: I don't -- I'm not going to ask you 23 if you recognize the document, but do you recall the 24 event to which it -- to which it refers? 25 A: Yes, I do.

1 Q: And it's a Williams Treaty community 2 protest. What were they protesting; do you recall that? 3 A: They had been in negotiations with 4 the previous Provincial Government on harvesting rights; 5 that -- that process that they had been involved in was 6 cancelled by the incoming Conservative government. 7 Q: Would it be fair to say that the 8 community harvest agreements were negotiated with the Rae 9 government? 10 A: Yes, that's correct. 11 Q: And that when the Harris government 12 came in, those agreements were cancelled? 13 A: Yes. 14 Q: And that, of course, occurred prior 15 to September the 15th, 1995? 16 A: Yes. 17 Q: In the few months that the government 18 -- that that government had been in office? 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: And this, of course, if you see the 21 date, Commissioner, is virtually contemporaneous with the 22 events that we're looking at. 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, I 24 noticed that. 25

1 CONTINUED BY MR. WILLIAM HENDERSON: 2 Q: So, the -- the view that you 3 described earlier with respect to the general policies 4 and approach of the Harris government were known and 5 communicated even then? 6 A: Yes, they were. 7 Q: As of mid-September. You also 8 indicated that you saw the -- the role of the Attorney 9 General also being the minister responsible for 10 aboriginal affairs as possibly a negative step in the 11 context of the -- the Harris government appointment? 12 A: Yes, definitely a conflict of 13 interest. When the processes we were engaged in was 14 being able to try to change the current policies and, in 15 fact, the -- the jurisdiction stance of the Ontario 16 government, we were now dealing with someone who was to 17 uphold the -- the laws of the province. 18 Q: Now, in -- in fairness, when the 19 Peterson government was in office, Mr. Ian Scott was both 20 the -- the Attorney General and the minister responsible 21 as well? 22 A: Yes. There was a couple of switches 23 there and at one (1) point he was, yes. 24 Q: And did you see him as effective in 25 that role or did you see that as a conflict at the time

1 as well? 2 A: No. We identified that as a conflict 3 as well. 4 Q: Right. And under the Rae government 5 I believe Bud Wildman was the minister responsible for 6 aboriginal affairs? 7 A: Yes, he was. 8 Q: But he was not the Attorney General? 9 A: No, he was the Minister of Natural 10 Resources. 11 Q: And did you consider him to be more 12 effective in that role? 13 A: Yes. 14 Q: Do you want to add any comment to 15 that organizational issue of the Provincial Governments 16 since -- 17 A: No. We've -- we've had a variety of 18 people who have held those -- those portfolios. And in 19 the past, prior to the -- prior to the -- the Liberal 20 government, when -- when Peterson was in power, it was 21 held by the Minister of Natural Resources as well. 22 And so there was always cause for us to be 23 -- to be concerned anytime that the Attorney General's 24 office became involved in -- in the -- the kinds of -- of 25 relationships that we were trying to build.

1 Q: You also had occasion to refer to, I 2 believe it was then Premier Bob Rae and his description 3 of the -- the Federal and Provincial Governments looking 4 at First Nations issues and playing a game of 5 constitutional ping-pong? 6 A: Yes. 7 Q: Was that statement made by him at a - 8 - at a dinner shortly after he was elected? 9 A: I believe it was. 10 Q: At the University of Toronto and the 11 Federal Minister of Indian Affairs was present? 12 A: Yes, I believe he was. 13 Q: And the Premier said at that time 14 that that -- that situation was going to change? 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: Has it to this day? 17 A: No. 18 MR. WILLIAM HENDERSON: Thank you, sir. 19 Those are my questions. 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I think Mr. 21 Eyolfson has some questions. 22 23 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. BRIAN EYOLFSON: 24 Q: Good morning, Mr. Peters. 25 A: Good morning.

1 Q: My name is Brian Eyolfson and I'm one 2 (1) of the lawyers for Aboriginal Legal Services of 3 Toronto. 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: And I just have a couple of questions 6 for you now in light of some of the questions that have 7 already been asked. 8 Now, in your evidence you referred to 9 trying to get the OPP to de-escalate in the days 10 immediately following September 6th; correct? 11 A: That's correct. 12 Q: Okay. And you also referred to 13 "wanting to get our own constables in place", and I 14 understand that you mean constables who were part of the 15 Indian Policing Program? 16 A: That's correct. 17 Q: And that would include the 18 Anishnaabek Police Services? 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: And I take it from your -- from your 21 evidence, that this was an important objective? 22 A: Yes, it was. 23 Q: And can you clarify why this was an 24 important objective? 25 A: Well, the concern was that the -- the

1 OPP again were going to make another strike at people 2 that were -- that were in the Park. Also because there 3 were a lot of people that were coming to the Park and 4 people that were coming to the barracks from different 5 communities, that were coming to be able to support. 6 And -- and we also knew that -- that the - 7 - the police were escalating at the time. And we wanted 8 to be able to create a -- a buffer zone, a safety zone. 9 And we -- we thought the only way that we could create 10 that was by having our own police patrol, especially the 11 road that -- that was along the barracks. 12 Q: Okay. Thank you. And at a couple of 13 points in your evidence yesterday you mentioned media 14 coverage of the incidents at Ipperwash; do you recall 15 that? 16 A: Yes. 17 Q: Okay. And did you have any concerns 18 about any media coverage of the incidents at that time? 19 A: We had a lot of concern with that. 20 In fact -- in fact, we -- we had a couple of individuals 21 tracking the media, trying to help us to -- to ascertain 22 what the -- what the spin was that was being put on -- on 23 information that was being presented to the media. 24 And then subsequent to that we went and we 25 met with the editorial board of the London Free Press as

1 one (1) example of -- of our understanding because what 2 we did was, we took documents to them and showed them the 3 -- the changes in the process; and that it was -- it was 4 our contention that -- that whenever an incident occurs, 5 when -- when everything -- when anything occurs that's 6 related to indigenous people, whoever from -- from the 7 perspective of authority puts out a press release, 8 they're going to be believed automatically. 9 In this case, the police put out a 10 document that said that they were fired upon; that became 11 the -- that became the -- the standard format that the 12 media used until -- until we were able to talk to the 13 media -- members of them and to be able to -- to give our 14 side of the story. 15 And I don't think a lot of the media 16 really, really changes gears until the Federal Government 17 issues the document that there's a burial ground in the 18 Park. I think at that stage a lot of media then started 19 to backtrack and to be able to start -- to be able to 20 ascertain whether or not the information that they had 21 was -- was 100 percent correct. 22 Q: Okay. And were there, in your view, 23 were there any portrayals of First Nations people in the 24 media that you found problematic at the time? 25 A: There was always portrayals in the --

1 in the -- it was consistent -- it was consistent with the 2 other incidents that had taken place, renegades, rebels, 3 dissidents, breakaway groups, general -- general 4 terminology such as that that would say that -- that 5 people had -- that indigenous people, in general, have no 6 legitimate claim to be doing anything beyond cooperating 7 with provincial authorities. 8 Q: And I take it from what you're saying 9 this is something you've observed at other situations, 10 not only Ipperwash? 11 A: Yes. It -- it's -- the media's been 12 fairly consistent in their approach. 13 Q: Okay. Thank you very much. Those 14 are all my questions. 15 A: Thank you. 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you, 17 Mr. Eyolfson. Mr. Myrka, I think you're up next on 18 behalf of the Province. 19 20 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. WALTER MYRKA: 21 Q: Good morning, Mr. Peters, my name's 22 Walter Myrka and I represent the province of Ontario. 23 A: Good morning. 24 Q: I just -- I just have a few questions 25 for you. In your evidence you talked about being asked

1 to negotiate some issues between the -- the Chief at 2 Kettle Point and the Council, and the people at Stoney 3 Point? 4 A: That's correct. 5 Q: Can you assist me in understanding 6 what some of the points of differences were? 7 A: The question of -- of whether or not 8 there was one (1) community, whether or not there was one 9 (1) -- there were two (2) communities that operated under 10 one (1) government, or there were two (2) separate 11 individual communities were -- were the basic premises 12 that I heard. 13 Q: And is it fair to say that the 14 central dispute, then, concerned whether the people at 15 Stoney Point should, amongst other things, be represented 16 as a separate Band from that at Kettle Point? 17 A: Yes; that was the -- that was the -- 18 that was the view of the people from -- 19 Q: Okay. 20 A: -- from Stoney Point. 21 Q: Now, at the time of the -- the 22 negotiations and -- and these other meetings in Toronto 23 that happened, in your evidence the other day, you 24 indicated that Chief Bressette and Councillors were there 25 as representatives of Kettle Point; is that fair?

1 A: I remember -- I remember the Chief 2 being there. 3 Q: Okay. 4 A: I remember other individuals there, I 5 can't tell you whether specifically or not they were 6 councillors, but I -- I do believe they were. 7 Q: And for the people at Stoney Point, 8 your evidence the other day was, if I remember it 9 correctly, was that you couldn't recall specifically who 10 was at the meetings. 11 A: That's correct. 12 Q: Okay. Now, this morning Mr. Ross 13 directed you to Exhibit P-205, that was the one that was 14 on the screen. 15 A: Hmm hmm. 16 Q: And that contains a list of the 17 Stoney Point members who were present at the second 18 meeting on July 22. 19 So, I take it that document refreshes your 20 memory as to who was there as members of the Stoney Point 21 Group? 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: Okay. Does it help you at all in -- 24 in recalling who was present at the earlier meeting? 25 A: No, it doesn't. I -- I just know

1 that -- I just know in the earlier meetings that we had a 2 lot of people, same as this session that there were quite 3 a few people there. 4 Q: Of the people who were present, that 5 is the members of the Stony Point group, do you recall if 6 anyone identified themselves as an Elder or a leader of 7 the group; or as a representative of the community? 8 A: I can't recall. 9 Q: Okay. Now the -- the discussions 10 that happened, there was no reference or discussion at 11 all to Ipperwash Provincial Park; that was your evidence, 12 is that correct? 13 A: Yes. 14 Q: Okay. And at the time, it was July 15 of 1993 that these discussions were going on, the members 16 of the Stoney Point community, do I take it that -- that 17 would describe the people who, at the time, had chosen to 18 reside within the Canadian Forces Base at Camp Ipperwash? 19 And who had moved there earlier that year. 20 A: I don't know that to be true. 21 Whether or not they were actually inside the barracks or 22 -- or within that area or not, no. 23 Q: Okay. Now if you can look at your 24 book of documents, I'd like to take you to Tabs 1 and 2. 25 And, Commissioner, these -- Tab 1 was introduced as

1 Exhibit P-291 and Tab 2 as Exhibit P-292. 2 Now, Mr. Peters, you were very much 3 involved in drafting the terms of this draft agreement, 4 is that fair? 5 A: That's correct. 6 Q: Okay. And do I understand that it 7 was the central point of this document or what was -- 8 what was hoped to be agreed to amongst the participants, 9 is that there would be further research and analysis that 10 would be undertaken co-operatively and jointly with the 11 view to resolving the issue of whether there was one (1) 12 community or there was two (2) communities. 13 A: That was a central issue. 14 Q: Okay. And that was something that 15 would take some time to hopefully achieve a resolution? 16 A: Yes. 17 Q: Okay. Now once the draft agreement 18 was at least put on paper and would that have been as a 19 result of the two (2) meetings? Or would -- would this 20 draft have been prepared in advance of the meetings or 21 perhaps after the first meeting, but before the second 22 one? 23 A: It would have been prepared after the 24 first meeting I -- I would assume. 25 Q: Okay.

1 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Just to clarify. Just 2 -- I mean it's obvious from the fact sheet, which is 3 dated July 14th and therefore prior to the July 22nd 4 meeting, that at minimum it was drafted before the second 5 meeting. 6 MR. WALTER MYRKA: Thank you. 7 8 CONTINUED BY MR. WALTER MYRKA. 9 Q: If I can ask you then to look at the 10 document at Tab 2. And this is the fax from Mr. Ronald 11 George. If you can just take a moment and look at the 12 first sentence of that letter. 13 In that sentence, Mr. Peters, Mr. George 14 refers to the July 22 meeting between members of the 15 Kettle Point and Stoney Point Councils. And he goes on 16 in the letter, particularly at page 2, to refer to the 17 Stoney Point Council. And I take from his letter that he 18 is taking instructions from what he describes as the 19 Stoney Point Council. 20 What was your understanding of what was 21 the Stoney Point Council and who were the members? 22 A: I knew that at the time that they had 23 a number of people who -- who were trying to organize 24 themselves, I don't know -- I don't know the process that 25 they took in organizing themselves, I only know that they

1 were trying to organize themselves into a representative 2 body. 3 Q: So I take it that -- is it fair to 4 say that at the time it was at least unclear to you who 5 the members of this Council might be, if indeed there was 6 a -- a formal Council or an elected Council within the 7 Stoney Point group? 8 A: I believe -- I believe some were 9 identified in the course of the -- of the meetings that 10 took place. 11 Q: But you don't recall who those would 12 be? 13 A: No, I don't recall exactly who they 14 were. 15 Q: Okay. 16 A: We would have gone through that 17 process of introductions and -- and people identifying 18 themselves. But because of the -- of the kind of process 19 that we were engaged in, we didn't record those sessions. 20 Q: Hmm hmm. Okay. Now, looking at page 21 2 of Mr. George's letter, and if you can look at the 22 first full paragraph which begins, "The Stoney Point 23 Council." And Mr. George in his letter states: 24 "The Stoney Point Council has further 25 instructed me to advise you of the

1 following fundamental principles 2 embraced by their membership which must 3 at least be recognized and respected 4 throughout the process." 5 And the very first point is as follows: 6 "The Stoney Point Band must be given 7 full Band status pursuant to the 8 provisions of the Indian Act." 9 And then in the second point: 10 "The Stoney Point Reserve Number 43 11 must be returned to the Stoney Point 12 Band." 13 Now, wasn't at least the second point, and 14 perhaps both points, the central dispute between the two 15 (2) groups at the time? 16 A: As I indicated earlier, there was a 17 number of -- a number of positions that were being 18 espoused at the time and -- and definitely from the 19 perspective of -- of the people at Stoney Point, their 20 perspective was that they had a single community and they 21 should be recognized as such. 22 Q: And that wasn't the position of Chief 23 Bressette? 24 A: No, it wasn't. They -- their 25 perception was that they've always had one (1) governing

1 Council. 2 Q: Okay. Now, I'd like to change the 3 subject and ask you to move to Tab number 11. 4 And, Commissioner, this was Exhibit P- 5 297, Inquiry Document 1009017, if I have that right. 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, okay. 7 8 CONTINUED BY MR. WALTER MYRKA: 9 Q: And this is your September 8, 1995 10 letter to Minister Irwin. Now, as I recall your 11 evidence, you were not advised, consulted in any way, 12 about Ipperwash Provincial Park and the events there 13 prior to the death of Dudley George on September 6th; is 14 that fair? 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: Okay. And you first arrived at Camp 17 Ipperwash and the provincial Park the next day, it was 18 September 7th? 19 A: Yes, that's correct. 20 Q: Okay. And you wrote this letter the 21 next day? 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: Okay. Now, if I can just take you to 24 the last paragraph on the first page of the letter. And 25 my question concerns the second sentence in that

1 paragraph. And I'll just read it to you: 2 "The Elders have said that sacred 3 burial grounds are located in the 4 Park." 5 Can I ask you first who you meant by the 6 Elders when you wrote that letter? 7 A: Some of the older people that were 8 around. 9 Q: And would these have been members of 10 the Stoney Point group? 11 A: Some were, some weren't. 12 Q: Okay. And do you recall any of their 13 names? 14 A: Not offhand, I couldn't give you any 15 names. 16 Q: Okay. And do you recall what they 17 told you about burial grounds at Ipperwash Provincial 18 Park? 19 A: They told me where the burial grounds 20 were. And, in fact, the morning that I was there, on the 21 7th, I was taken and I was shown the areas inside the 22 Park where the burial grounds were. 23 Q: And do you recall today where those 24 areas were; can you describe them in any way? 25 A: They were situated on -- on the east

1 portion of -- of the Park. 2 Q: Now, there's -- there's quite a few 3 acres that comprise the Park; do you remember what the 4 land was like? Can you be more specific than the east -- 5 that simply the east portion; are -- are you able to 6 assist? 7 A: No. 8 Q: Okay. 9 A: I've -- I haven't been in the Park 10 for -- you know, since -- since probably that fall. 11 Q: Okay. 12 A: It was probably the last time I was 13 in the Park. 14 Q: Okay. And so, it was on September 15 7th that you were taken around the Park and shown these 16 areas? 17 A: Yes. 18 Q: And do you recall if it was one (1) 19 area, if it was three (3) areas or how many areas were -- 20 A: I can't recall. I only remember the 21 one (1) area that -- that I can recall at this point and 22 that was -- that was what I have indicated to you thus 23 far. 24 Q: And was it one (1) person who showed 25 you this area? Was it a group of people?

1 A: No, I was with a group of people 2 because they -- we were doing the -- we were doing the -- 3 the follow-up to the activities that had taken place the 4 night before. 5 So they were taking me through the Park, 6 they were taking me through the area outside the Park 7 where -- where Dudley had been shot and showed me the 8 buses, the car and they had showed me the burnt building. 9 They showed me -- and they showed me where the burial 10 grounds were. 11 Q: Okay. Now, there's a diagram that's 12 just been placed before you; it's a diagram of the 13 campground and the Park. It's Exhibit P-61. Now, does 14 that assist your recollection in being able to show us 15 where it was you were shown that there were burial 16 grounds at the Park? 17 A: It doesn't help me at all, I don't 18 know which direction is what on here, I'm sorry. If you 19 could tell me which direction is what. 20 Q: Okay. 21 22 (BRIEF PAUSE) 23 24 Q: All right. I'm -- I'm told that if 25 you look at the -- the map that's on the screen, north is

1 pointing upwards, therefore east would be pointing to the 2 right, towards you. If it helps you, fine, if it doesn't 3 then you can just tell us. 4 A: I'm sorry, no. I'm -- I -- 5 physically I could -- I could show you, but not on the 6 map I can't. 7 Q: Okay. Now, were you told, when you 8 were shown where these areas were, were you told what the 9 basis was for the belief by one (1) or more people there 10 that there were burial grounds at those locations? 11 A: Historical knowledge. 12 Q: And what do you recall that they told 13 you about what they -- what they'd been told in the past? 14 A: They'd been told -- I was told a 15 number of things about the area. Number 1, I was told 16 that it was a gathering area for people to come to be 17 able to do healing work, that -- that there were specific 18 energies within that area that were -- that were -- that 19 people came. 20 I was also told that -- that -- that not 21 only were Stoney Point people buried there, but other 22 people from other communities that -- that were buried 23 there as well. 24 And when -- and when people tell me that, 25 I -- I believe that. If they have historical knowledge,

1 I mean that's the way that our history is transmitted 2 through stories and -- and oral understanding so -- 3 Q: Hmm hmm. 4 A: -- I'm not going to challenge them 5 and say -- 6 Q: Yeah. 7 A: -- you know, I don't -- I know your 8 territory better than you that there's no burial ground 9 here. I accept the fact that they tell me there's a 10 burial ground, so there is one. 11 Q: Okay. And after you were there, 12 starting September 7th, were there any discussions that 13 you had or investigations that took place that you recall 14 concerning the issue of burial grounds at Ipperwash Park? 15 A: Can you repeat your question again, 16 please? 17 Q: All right. After you were shown 18 these -- these areas, these burial grounds on September 19 7th, did you hear anything further about the burial 20 grounds while you were there? 21 A: Yes, I did. 22 Q: Okay. And can you just tell us what 23 it was that you were told or that you heard? 24 A: Just from -- from a variety of people 25 that -- that they were going to still maintain their

1 connection to the burial ground and that they weren't 2 prepared to be able to give up the burial grounds. 3 Q: Okay. Did you hear anything about 4 any investigations as to locating the burial grounds? 5 A: No, I did not. 6 Q: Okay. And as far as you recall, was 7 anything done after September 7th to locate burial 8 grounds, to confirm that they indeed existed in any way? 9 A: I don't think that there was any need 10 for me to confirm that the burial grounds were there. I 11 mean, obviously that report was issued by the Federal 12 Government. It was tabled by the Federal Government that 13 -- that indicated the burial grounds were in fact there. 14 And then some of the spiritual Elders who 15 came to -- to Ipperwash did ceremonies there. So I mean 16 that's all -- that's all in accordance with our -- with 17 our culture and traditions that those things are done. 18 Q: Okay. And can you help me in 19 understanding what kind of ceremonies would be -- were 20 done after September 7th? 21 A: There were -- there were -- well one 22 in particular that relates specifically to the burial 23 ground is that there were bones that were re-buried. And 24 there's a particular ceremony that goes -- goes with that 25 because once -- once you disturb those -- those bones,

1 they have to be put back in a place in a particular 2 manner and that's what the Elders did. 3 Q: And do you recall when that happened 4 and if you were there? 5 A: I was still there, but I can't tell 6 you a specific date. But I was still in the Park at the 7 time. Q: Were you there at the ceremony? 8 A: Yes, I was. 9 Q: Okay. And this was a re-burial of 10 bones? 11 A: Yes. 12 Q: And do you know where the bones came 13 from? 14 A: No, I don't. 15 Q: Okay. And you don't recall if that 16 was in September, October; was it still in the fall? 17 A: It was still in the fall. It 18 would've probably been -- it would've probably been still 19 in September. 20 Q: Okay. 21 A: It may have been right shortly around 22 the time of the funeral, maybe right after. 23 Q: Okay. All right. Thank you very 24 much. Those are my questions. 25 A: Thank you.

1 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 2 very much, Mr. Myrka. 3 I think we'll take a morning break now. 4 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry will recess 5 for fifteen (15) minutes. 6 7 --- Upon recessing at 10:26 a.m. 8 --- Upon resuming at 10:44 a.m. 9 10 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry is now 11 resumed. Please be seated. 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I think 13 Andrea Tuck-Jackson is next and you're up, ready to go. 14 MS. ANDREA TUCK-JACKSON: I am, sir. 15 Good morning, Commissioner. 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Good 17 morning. 18 19 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. ANDREA TUCK-JACKSON. 20 Q: Good morning, Mr. Peters. 21 A: Good morning. 22 Q: My name is Andrea Tuck-Jackson and 23 I'm going to be asking you some questions on behalf of 24 the OPP. And I wanted to begin if I may, sir, in 25 clarifying two (2) aspects of your evidence.

1 First of all -- and I may have mis-heard 2 you yesterday and that's what I wanted to -- to revisit. 3 I understood you to testify yesterday that there was an 4 OPP presence at Ganisatage (phonetic) or Oka; did I hear 5 that correctly? 6 A: I don't recall. 7 Q: Then I may have mis-heard you. 8 Because it -- 9 A: I guess you did. 10 Q: It -- it was my understanding that 11 the OPP did not have any -- 12 A: No, they didn't have any role in it. 13 Q: -- presence there. 14 A: It was -- it was the Surete 15 (phonetic). 16 Q: Exactly. All right. Good enough. 17 And I also understood, sir, you testified yesterday that 18 during Red Squirrel that the Commissioner of the OPP 19 attended there and that you had some contact with him; do 20 I have that correct? 21 A: Yes. I believe it was the 22 commissioner, I -- if I remember correctly, he came in by 23 helicopter. 24 Q: It may be, sir, that it was not the 25 commissioner but it was the Chief of the region in

1 question; is that possible? 2 A: It's possible. 3 Q: All right. It has admittedly been a 4 long time ago. 5 A: Yeah. 6 Q: All right. I want to move forward 7 then, if I can, sir, to your role as mediator in the 8 Ipperwash-related issues. And as you've stated very 9 clearly and very definitively, the only time that you 10 served as a mediator was during the summer of 1993? 11 A: That's correct. 12 Q: All right. And you told us yesterday 13 that before you, in your capacity as Regional Chief, can 14 intervene to try and mediate some type of a dispute, you 15 have to be requested to do so by the First Nations 16 community or communities in question? 17 A: That's correct. 18 Q: All right. And I also understood you 19 to say yesterday that -- that with the benefit of 20 hindsight, had the OPP invited you to intervene during 21 the occupation of the Park, you would have certainly have 22 come down to assist; is that correct? 23 A: That's correct. 24 Q: But I trust, sir, you'd agree with me 25 that you would not be able to do so unless, indeed, you

1 had also received a request or, at the very least, the 2 consent of the First Nations communities involved? 3 A: I would have come to talk to the 4 communities, definitely, yes. 5 Q: And but my point is, is that you 6 couldn't actually come in to -- to assume a role as 7 mediator unless you had their consent? 8 A: Yes. I would have went to them and I 9 would have talked to them about that. 10 Q: All right. And if there had not been 11 a willingness to have you there to mediate, for whatever 12 reason, you could not have done so even if the OPP had 13 wanted you to assist? 14 A: That's correct. 15 Q: All right. And as we know, sir, at 16 no time during the Park occupation were you asked by 17 those occupying those lands or the area that is often 18 described as Stoney Point, you were not invited to come 19 down and attempt to mediate? 20 A: No, I wasn't. I was asked -- I was 21 asked to assist them. 22 Q: That's after the fact on September 23 the 6th? 24 A: After -- after September 6th, yes. 25 Q: All right. I'm actually limiting --

1 and I should be more specific in my question, I'm sorry - 2 - I'm limiting to the time of the Park occupation but 3 prior to the shooting of Dudley George, so in that time 4 frame you were not invited to intervene? 5 A: No, I wasn't. 6 Q: And you also were not invited to 7 intervene by the Chief and Council of Kettle and Stony 8 Point? 9 A: No, I wasn't. 10 Q: All right. And we know, sir, that 11 the last time that you had been asked to -- to work as a 12 facilitator or a mediator, more to the point, a mediator, 13 was the summer of 1993? 14 A: That's correct. 15 Q: We also know that you had attended, 16 in an unofficial capacity, but nonetheless attended at 17 the area that's sometimes described as the Army Base in 18 the summer of 1995; correct? 19 A: In -- I couldn't be specific in terms 20 of where I was but, yes, I had been there. 21 Q: All right. And I trust that during 22 your attendance there, at no time did any of the 23 occupiers or Stoney Pointers, if I may refer to them that 24 way, approached you and asked you to return to your role 25 as mediator to try and resolve issues that related to the

1 occupation of that land? 2 A: There were individuals who did ask me 3 to do certain things and I wasn't clear on what role that 4 they were playing. 5 Q: Okay. 6 A: You know, so some I followed up on, 7 some I didn't do anything with. 8 Q: I'm sorry, your voice dropped, I 9 couldn't hear. 10 A: Some I followed up on and some I 11 didn't do anything with. 12 Q: All right. The point is that you 13 weren't asked to assume any type of a formal role to try 14 and mediate the issues that were still outstanding 15 between the Kettle and Stony Point community and those 16 who were occupying CFB Base? 17 A: No, I was not. 18 Q: Thank you. Would it be fair to say, 19 sir, from what you could observe at your attendance there 20 in 1995, that there didn't seem to be a impetus or an 21 interest, for whatever reason, and I don't say it 22 critically, but there didn't seem to be an impetus or an 23 interest on the part of those people at the Base to try 24 and mediate a resolution of the issues and the 25 differences that existed between the two (2) communities.

1 A: I think they -- what I -- what I -- 2 what I observed was that they were trying to get 3 organized. 4 Q: And they weren't yet at a stage to 5 try and mediate? 6 A: I believe that's what happened. 7 Q: Thank you. 8 A: Those people who had been part of the 9 process earlier were no longer part of the process. 10 Q: Thank you. And would it be fair to 11 say, sir, that you were aware that an offer by Ovide 12 Mercredi to come in and mediate during the summer of 1995 13 had been rejected by those at Stoney Point? 14 A: Yes, I was aware of that. 15 Q: All right. I trust, then, in light 16 of -- of knowing that it didn't come as a surprise to you 17 that you were not asked to try and serve as a mediator 18 during that time frame? 19 A: That's correct. 20 Q: Thank you. And would it be fair to 21 say, sir, that upon your arrival on September the 7th, 22 1995, no one from the group of occupiers, the Stoney 23 Pointers, either at the Park or in combination at the 24 Base, no one self-identified as a leader or spokesperson 25 for that group?

1 A: There was no one that self- 2 identified? 3 Q: As a leader or spokesperson for that 4 group? 5 A: No, the first people that I met were 6 a group of individuals. 7 Q: All right. But my point is that -- 8 that no one identified as a -- as individual leader. I 9 think you've actually answered my question. 10 A: No, they identified themselves as a 11 group process. 12 Q: All right. I want to take you then, 13 if I could, to the transcript of your conference call 14 that occurred on the morning of September the 7th. And I 15 wonder if Exhibit P-252 could be placed before Mr. 16 Peters? 17 18 (BRIEF PAUSE) 19 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Do you know 21 what tab it is in our binder so -- 22 MS. ANDREA TUCK-JACKSON: I believe it's 23 Tab 75. 24 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Yes. 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you.

1 MS. ANDREA TUCK-JACKSON: I apologize, I 2 don't have the document number at the tip of my tongue. 3 4 CONTINUED BY MS. ANDREA TUCK-JACKSON: 5 Q: And I'm particularly interested, sir, 6 at page 2 of the transcript or the notes, in fairness, 7 the -- the notes. And you'll see, sir, about halfway 8 down the second page there is a comment that has been 9 attributed to Chief Mercredie to the effect that: 10 "Has anyone emerged as a leader or is 11 there just a general feeling?" 12 And Chief Bressette replies to the effect 13 of: 14 "Just a feeling, no real spokesperson." 15 And I trust that those were observations 16 that -- that you also agreed with at the time? 17 A: Group process, I think, was -- was a 18 valid form of them trying to be able to organize 19 themselves. 20 Q: I'm not -- I'm not criticizing the 21 form, sir, but perhaps I -- I could put this in a bit of 22 context for you that might -- might assist you. 23 We've heard evidence from a number of 24 those individuals who were occupying the Park during the 25 -- the 4th, 5th, and 6th, that attempts were made by the

1 OPP to try and speak to someone there to open up a 2 dialogue and that, for example, those efforts were 3 regarded as harassment by the police. 4 And we've also heard evidence from a 5 number of the Occupiers that no one wished to self- 6 identify as a leader or a spokesperson for a variety of 7 reasons to deal with the police. 8 And I was interested, sir, in your 9 observation as to whether or not, indeed no single person 10 appeared to be coming forward, again for whatever reason 11 to speak on behalf of the group of people at Stoney 12 Point? 13 A: Didn't know if it required a single 14 person to be able to do that when they were working as a 15 group. 16 Q: Okay. You've answered my question, 17 I'm going to move on, sir. 18 A: Okay. 19 Q: I want to move on, if I can, to the 20 meetings that I understand you participated in with 21 various other leaders of First Nations communities and 22 also members of the OPP and the purpose of these 23 meetings, I'm going to suggest to you, was to work out in 24 a conciliatory fashion, a variety of policing operational 25 issues. Would that be fair to say?

1 A: I don't know which meeting you're 2 talking about. 3 Q: I'm referring to meetings that took 4 place on September the 8th, a meeting that took -- 5 meetings that culminated in the signing of the memorandum 6 of understanding which I understand was signed on 7 September the 17th. 8 A: Are you talking about the meeting 9 that took place in Grand Bend in the evening? 10 Q: There was a meeting that took place 11 following the talking circle on the evening of September 12 the 7th; that I suppose we could classify as the first 13 meeting. 14 I understand, sir, there was also a 15 meeting on the early evening of September the 8th and 16 that there were various other meetings that occurred from 17 time to time. 18 Another on the 16th of September which 19 again culminated in the signing of the memorandum of 20 understanding on the 17th of September. It may be, sir, 21 that you weren't attending all of those meetings. 22 A: I don't know if I attended them all 23 but I did attend meetings with the -- with the police. 24 Q: All right. And I'm going to suggest 25 to you that the purpose as you saw it of those meetings

1 was to discuss and work out a number of outstanding 2 policing operational issues. And I'm happy to go through 3 those. So let's do that if it assists. 4 A: Sure, go ahead. 5 Q: So for example one (1) of the issues 6 that had to be resolved was access to what had been 7 identified as a crime scene at the intersection of Army 8 Camp Road and East Parkway Drive. 9 A: That's correct. 10 Q: Okay. Another issue that had to be 11 worked out was who was going to police the area. The 12 perimeter to the Park and the Base and the area along the 13 beachfront that extended by East Parkway Drive; that was 14 another issue. 15 A: Yes; that's correct, yes. 16 Q: How checkpoints were going to be 17 handled was another issue. 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: Another issue, for example, was the 20 police presence or lack thereof at the time of the 21 funeral of Dudley George. 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: Another issue for example was the 24 presence of the police boat offshore approximate to the 25 Park.

1 A: Yes. 2 Q: All right. So I'm going to suggest 3 to you again that it was these kinds of issues as you saw 4 it that had to be resolved and the purpose of those 5 meetings were to resolve those issues. 6 A: Yeah. The purpose of those were to 7 be able to de-escalate the -- the police presence. 8 Q: That's a much better way of 9 articulating it, all right. So the purpose of those 10 meetings was to find a way to de-escalate the situation 11 such that all of those people who had an interest would 12 be de-stressed and satisfied to -- to the best 13 possibility. 14 A: Yes. 15 Q: Okay. And I understand, sir, I want 16 to take you through just a number of those meetings that 17 -- I want to begin with -- with what occurred on the 18 evening of September the 7th. 19 And I understand, sir, that a talking 20 circle was held up at -- I think it's called the Pinedale 21 Motel up near Grand Bend. 22 A: Pine something. Yeah, I went to 23 that. 24 Q: Something like that. All right. And 25 I don't want to ask you about anything that was said or

1 specifically occurred during the talking circle. Because 2 I understand that's not appropriate to do so. 3 But I trust, sir, that what you can 4 confirm for me was that Paul Trivett was in attendance 5 during that talking circle. 6 A: Yes. We didn't know who he was. 7 Nobody knew who he was, but yes, he was there. 8 Q: Did you later come to learn, sir, 9 that he was a member of the OPP? 10 A: We knew that evening he was. 11 Q: All right. You also understood that 12 he was a First Nations person? 13 A: We didn't know that. 14 Q: At the time? 15 A: At time. 16 Q: You later came to learn that? 17 <