This post is part of an educational campaign by Blackfoot Confederacy Tribal Council—separating fiction from fact, correcting misinformation, and protecting Blackfoot and First Nations’ rights.

Week 4 – Fiction vs Fact: The Myth of a “Modern Treaty” and the Attempt to Reframe Blackfoot Treaty 7

Fiction:
A “modern-day treaty” of the Otipemisiwak Métis Government creates a nation-to-nation relationship equal to or parallel with Blackfoot Treaty 7, and positions the MNA as a treaty nation in Blackfoot Territory.

Fact:
The MNA describes a treaty as a “legally binding, nation-to-nation agreement that affirms rights, responsibilities, and relationships between the Crown and Indigenous nations.” That definition is correct — and it belongs to the First Nations who actually entered treaties with the Crown. The Niitsitapi fulfilled every part of that definition in 1877. The MNA did not.

The MNA claims their modern agreement will “chart a path forward to an enduring, nation-to-nation, government-to-government relationship with Canada through a modern-day treaty.” But this language only underscores the truth: Treaty 7 already created that relationship here — long before the MNA existed. The MNA’s attempt to adopt treaty language does not elevate their agreement; it exposes that their political project relies on attaching itself to the very treaties they were not part of.

The MNA also contrasts “historic” treaties with “modern-day” ones, framing Treaty 7 as an outdated land-transfer agreement while painting their own as progressive, rights-affirming, and more aligned with today’s legal landscape. But this narrative is misleading and disrespectful. Treaty 7 was not a land-transfer or land sale. It was a peace treaty with the Crown, created after years of warfare, starvation, smallpox, the collapse of the buffalo herds, and overwhelming pressure from colonial expansion. We entered Treaty 7 to protect our people — not because we misunderstood what we were signing, and not because we surrendered our homeland.

The MNA says their treaty will “affirm the rights of Indigenous peoples, not just recognize them.”
But Treaty 7 already affirms that: the Crown recognized Blackfoot sovereignty, laws, and territorial authority, and pledged peace in return. The MNA’s push to frame their modern agreement as a stronger, more legitimate form of treaty-making relies on diminishing ours — the very treaties that created the legal environment they are now trying to benefit from.

The MNA states their treaty will “ensure our self-government is protected regardless of changes in political power.” But First Nations already hold this protection under Treaty 7 and Section 35 — not because of new agreements, but because of our ancient relationship with these lands and the Crown. We do not need a modern adaptation of treaty principles to validate our sovereignty.

They also say their ancestors were “not included in the numbered treaties” and were instead part of the “broken scrip process.”
This is historically accurate — and it reinforces, not weakens, the truth:
Métis were not treaty signatories.
Métis were not rights-bearing Nations in Blackfoot Territory.
Métis were not partners in Blackfoot Treaty 7.

These admissions directly contradict today’s attempt to stand beside treaty nations as equals in the treaty-making process.

The MNA repeatedly emphasizes that their treaty is “not land or regionally-based,” yet they simultaneously assert province-wide harvesting rights and seek recognition across all of western Canada. This contradiction exposes the game: claim a “modern treaty” on paper, then use it politically to push into First Nations territories where there is no historical, legal, or kinship foundation.

And finally, the MNA notes that their treaty will be “binding on all governments and third parties.”
This includes First Nations — and that is precisely the danger.
A modern, province-wide “Métis treaty,” created without Blackfoot consent, attempts to place the MNA into the same constitutional space as the treaty nations whose sovereignty predates Canada itself. That is not reconciliation. That is political overreach.

We remind the Métis Nation of Alberta that they are descendants of First Peoples — and with that comes a responsibility to respect those who came before them, not rewrite our history to validate their political ambitions.

Blackfoot Treaty 7 is not “historic” in the sense the MNA frames it.
It is foundational. It is living. It is active.
And it will not be overshadowed by any modern political agreement designed to mimic its authority.

Solidarity and Respect

We are strengthened by many allies and by Métis organizations in southern Alberta who continue to speak the truth.

We thank our Elders, our knowledge keepers, our researchers, our community, and our allies who walk with us in truth and respect. Together we stand in unity and affirm what has never changed.

This is, and will always be, Niitsitapi Blackfoot Territory.