The Comforting Message

In late October 2025, a local cultural group on Newfoundland’s west coast — Penwaaq L’nu’k – Kji-Wikuom, one of several Facebook pages operated under Benoit First Nation and Jasen Benwah’s network of accounts — posted a statement meant to calm public concern about Indigenous self-government.¹³

“Self-government for us does NOT have anything to do with private or Crown lands.”

(Penwaaq L’nu’k – Kji-Wikuom Facebook page, October 2025)

The comment appeared beneath a post promoting cultural programming and the “Seven Grandfather Teachings,” shared on the group’s public page (facebook.com/PenwaaqLnuk) and visible in the original post (direct link) (local screenshot).

At first glance, the statement sounded reassuring: language, culture, and tradition — not land.

But the claim was more than a community comment; it reflected a growing talking point used across Newfoundland’s emerging self-government projects — a message that appears designed to reduce local resistance while Ottawa’s frameworks advance quietly in the background.

The problem is, that’s not how the Canadian legal system works.

In Canada, “self-government” is not a cultural status. It’s a constitutional recognition under section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982, and that recognition is built on land.¹

You cannot have self-government without a land base — because law-making power, taxation, resource management, and environmental jurisdiction are all tied to territory.

So even if a local organization believes it’s only working on cultural or educational programs, once the federal government becomes involved, it automatically enters the realm of Crown-land jurisdiction.

What Self-Government Actually Means

The federal government’s Inherent Right Policy (1995) defines “self-government” as the right of Indigenous communities to “govern their internal affairs and lands.”²

That single word — lands — changes everything.

Under this policy, any agreement recognized under section 35 becomes a modern treaty.

That treaty usually includes:

• Defined settlement lands,
• Law-making authority,
• Revenue-sharing,
• Resource co-management,
• And recognition of traditional-use rights on Crown land.³

Even if the agreement doesn’t start with a request for land (Benwah has already made his request to land in a letter posted and now removed from his website - it was addressed to then Premier Dwight Ball), it eventually must define where the new government’s jurisdiction applies.

That “where” is what makes every self-government agreement inherently tied to land — and specifically, to Crown land.

So when someone says “self-government has nothing to do with Crown land,” what they really mean is “we haven’t reached that stage yet.”

Newfoundland’s Quiet Stage

Newfoundland entered Confederation in 1949 without any treaties, reserves, or Indian Act bands.⁴

That made it unique — and for a long time, it insulated the island from the land-claim wave that swept across the rest of Canada in the 1970s and 1980s.

But that changed:

• In 1984, the Miawpukek (Conne River) community became the province’s first Indian Act band, with a small reserve — a parcel of Canada land held in trust by the federal Crown.⁵
• In 2011, the Qalipu Mi’kmaq First Nation was recognized, creating a landless band with more than 20 000 members across the island.⁶
• And in 2005, the Labrador Inuit finalized the Nunatsiavut Agreement, transferring thousands of square kilometres of Crown land into Inuit ownership and co-management.⁷

So while Newfoundland’s groups sometimes describe their goals as purely cultural, history shows that every successful recognition eventually leads back to land.

The Richmond Shockwave

On August 7 2025, the British Columbia Supreme Court issued a ruling that shook property law across Canada.

In Cowichan Tribes v. Canada (Attorney General), four First Nations from Vancouver Island won a declaration of Aboriginal title over land in Richmond — right in the middle of an urbanized area, full of homes, businesses, and industrial parks.⁸

The land in question wasn’t remote wilderness. It was part of Lulu Island, including areas long held in fee-simple ownership — legally “private property.”

The court found that Aboriginal title still existed beneath those titles because the land had never been lawfully surrendered.⁹

It didn’t order anyone evicted or stripped of their deeds.

But it did rule that:

• Certain Crown land grants unjustifiably infringed on Aboriginal title; and
• The governments of Canada and B.C. must now negotiate reconciliation between Indigenous title and private ownership.¹⁰

In other words, private property may stand — but it stands on top of Indigenous title, not instead of it.

This was the first time a Canadian court recognized Aboriginal title over private-type land, not just unoccupied Crown territory.¹¹

It’s a turning point — and it matters for Newfoundland more than people realize.

Why It Matters Here

Newfoundland still has vast stretches of unsurrendered Crown land, and its Indigenous communities never signed historical treaties.¹²

That means the same legal logic used in Richmond could, one day, be applied here.

If a court decided that Mi’kmaq or Innu title was never extinguished, then — even without a treaty — that title would exist beneath all Crown lands in the region, and potentially even beneath privately owned land that originated from older Crown grants.

No one would lose their home tomorrow.

But governments would be forced to negotiate the overlap between those rights — and that’s where the “nothing to do with land” narrative falls apart.

What This Could Mean (in plain language)

If the court case in British Columbia becomes a rule for all of Canada, a few big things could happen — even here in Newfoundland.

1. Two kinds of ownership at once:
2. A court could say that Indigenous title still exists under land already owned by people or the government.
3. You would still own your house, but another layer of ownership — Indigenous title — would exist underneath it.
4. Payments or sharing:
5. The government might have to pay or share money and resources with Indigenous groups for land that was used without permission in the past.
6. Shared control of Crown land:
7. Land owned by the Crown, like forests or coastlines, could be managed together by Indigenous nations and government.
8. That means new steps or approvals before companies can build or explore.
9. Extra rules for new projects:
10. Any big new project near these lands could need Indigenous consent or an environmental review before it moves ahead.
11. Map changes:
12. Some town lines, permits, or land-use plans might need to be redrawn so they match the new boundaries of recognized Indigenous lands.
13. Unclear rules for a while:
14. Until new agreements are signed, people and towns might not always know who has the final say over certain lands.
15. New fees or taxes:
16. Self-governing Indigenous regions could someday charge their own taxes or fees for using land or resources in their areas.

These things would not happen overnight.

They would happen slowly, through talks and agreements.

But once they do, the way land and power work in Canada could change for good.

The Newfoundland Blind Spot

When groups in Newfoundland say “self-government isn’t about land,” they are echoing a political talking point designed to reassure neighbors — not a legal statement of fact.

It’s similar to how early negotiations in Labrador were presented as “cultural recognition” before they evolved into the full Labrador Inuit Land Claims Agreement in 2005.⁷

That agreement now governs more than 70 000 km² of land and coastline — all of which used to be Crown land.

So the language we hear now on the island is part of a pattern:

• Soften the message,
• Build public comfort,
• Establish cultural programs,
• Then formalize governance over land when the framework is ready.

This is not deception — it’s strategy.

And it works because most people don’t realize how self-government and land rights are legally interlocked.

Why Truth Still Matters

Honesty and transparency — ironically two of the “Seven Grandfather Teachings” cited in the same Facebook post — require that the public be told the full story.

Telling residents that self-government “has nothing to do with land” creates false security, and ultimately breeds mistrust when people discover otherwise.

True reconciliation depends on accurate information, not comfort phrases.

And if the Cowichan ruling survives appeal, the conversation in Newfoundland will have to grow up fast.

Because even if no one’s home is in danger, the foundation beneath it might be.

See also

Credentialed Silence – How credentialism, funding, and institutional caution turned Newfoundland’s environmental voices into instruments of obedience rather than dissent.

Rehearsed Truth: How Repeating the Same Story Keeps Newfoundland Stuck – Why political and cultural leaders cling to safe narratives even when the facts have changed, and how it preserves public confusion.

The Local Paradox – The essay that started it all: how Newfoundland’s “community identity” has become the tool of its own erasure.

Green Land, Empty Hands – How global green finance frameworks use local virtue signals to mask resource capture and control.

From Hype to Harm: WEGH2 and the Reckoning NL Needs – How the province’s “green” megaprojects expose the illusion of environmental progress.

References

[1] The Constitution Acts, 1867 to 1982 – Section 35, Government of Canada – https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/const/page-13.html  

[2] Government of Canada, “The Government of Canada’s Approach to Implementation of the Inherent Right and the Negotiation of Aboriginal Self-Government” (1995) – https://rcaanc-cirnac.gc.ca/eng/1100100031843/1539869205136  

[3] Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada, “Canada’s Collaborative Modern Treaty Implementation Policy” – https://www.rcaanc-cirnac.gc.ca/eng/1672771319009/1672771475448  

[4] Heritage Newfoundland and Labrador, “Mi’kmaq Land Claims” – https://www.heritage.nf.ca/articles/indigenous/mikmaq-land-claims.php  

[5] Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, Office of Indigenous Affairs and Reconciliation – Miawpukek First Nation https://www.gov.nl.ca/exec/iar/miawpukek-first-nation/ 

[6] Qalipu First Nation – About (official site) – https://qalipu.ca/about/background/

[7] Government of Canada, “Labrador Inuit Land Claims Agreement Act” – https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/L-4.3/page-1.html  

[8] Global News, “Canada’s Longest Trial Ends with Precedent-Setting B.C. Land Claim Ruling” (August 2025) – https://globalnews.ca/news/11324599/canadas-longest-trial-precedent-setting-bc-land-claim-first-nations/  

[9] Young Anderson Barristers & Solicitors, “Aboriginal Title Declared Over Fee-Simple Lands in Landmark Decision” (2025) – https://www.younganderson.ca/publications/bulletins/aboriginal-title-declared-over-fee-simple-lands-in-landmark-decision  

[10] MLT Aikins LLP, “B.C. Supreme Court Recognizes Cowichan Aboriginal Title in Landmark Ruling” (2025) – https://www.mltaikins.com/insights/b-c-supreme-court-recognizes-cowichan-aboriginal-title-in-landmark-ruling/  

[11] Coast Reporter, “Cowichan Title Lands Encompass Multi-Million-Dollar Mansions in Richmond, B.C.” (2025) – https://www.coastreporter.net/national-sports/cowichan-title-lands-encompass-multimillion-dollar-mansions-in-richmond-bc-11068547  

[12] Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, Office of Indigenous Affairs and Reconciliation – Land Claims Overview – https://www.gov.nl.ca/exec/iar/overview/land-claims/  

[13] Facebook – Penwaaq L’nu’k – Kji-Wikuom official page, post containing comment “Self-government for us does NOT have anything to do with private or Crown lands.” (October 2025) – https://www.facebook.com/PenwaaqLnuk/posts/pfbid03juE8ToXxg37U3dhj4A9WW8GMeVxqManHkyXKrNQYexLYdu9XDyKYsy9HRkmsm6fl (local screenshot)