MKO has thirty-six years of real-world experience in pursuing the conduct of the Duty to Consult consistent with the Honour of the Crown. As just one example, between August, 2007 and June, 2009, MKO directly participated in the intensive and successful negotiation and execution of the very first Consultation Protocol between the Province of Manitoba and ANY First Nation in Manitoba. This is the June 3, 2009 Consultation Protocol between the Province of Manitoba and the Northlands Denesuline First Nation.
The MKO Chiefs in Assembly has passed Resolution 2022-08-14, Endorsement of Northlands Consultation Protocol as Principles and Process of the Duty to Consult which endorses the core principles and processes of the Northlands Consultation Protocol as THE principles and processes to be applied to ALL Duty to Consult processes in the MKO region.
As another example, on June 18, 2025, MKO wrote to the Prime Minister, the President of the Privy Council, the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations and to all Honourable Senators and to all Members of the House of Commons to urge that Bill C-5, the Building Canada Act, be amended to include a definition of “Duty to Consult”. Specifically, MKO proposed that the Building Canada Act be amended by adopting the definition of Duty to Consult at Annex A of the Updated Guidelines for Federal Officials to Fulfill the Duty to Consult, March 2011, being:
“The duty to consult is an obligation of the government as a whole. In Haida, Taku River and Mikisew Cree, the Supreme Court of Canada held that provincial and federal governments have a legal obligation to consult when the Crown contemplates conduct that might adversely impact potential or established Aboriginal or Treaty rights.”
Every potential Major Project, energy corridor or critical minerals development in northern Manitoba will be subject to the Crown’s legal obligation to carry out the Duty to Consult in a manner consistent with the Honour of the Crown.
Every Crown-First nation consultation process in the MKO Region must first determine whether the infringements of the twice-constitutionalized right to hunt, fish, trap and gather for food, support and subsistence and for social and ceremonial purposes can be constitutionally justified further to the tests in R. v. Sparrow.
It is MKO’s experience that Canada and Manitoba largely “skip over” the justification step of a Duty to Consult process. It is also MKO’s assessment that governments and developers assume, incorrectly, that any infringements of acknowledged and constitutionally protected rights are “pre-justified” and that consultations are really about mitigation and accommodation measures. MKO describes this constitutionally flawed approach to the Crown’s Duty to Consult consistent with the Honour of the Crown as “let’s make a deal.”
