August 25, 2025 • 58 mins
Chief Aaron Pete breaks down the Kamloops unmarked graves discovery, the book Grave Error, and the growing debate over so-called “Indian Residential School Deniers".
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Aaron Pete (00:34):
Right now, canada is caught in a growing emotional
debate, A debate over so-calledIndian residential school
denialism and the unmarkedgraves believed to exist at
former Indian residential schoolsites.
On May 29, 2021, a headlinefrom CBC stopped the country in
(00:54):
its tracks Remains of 215children found buried at former
BC residential school FirstNations say the story went
global.
It sparked vigils, churcharsons, parliamentary motions
and more than $246 million insurvivor-focused funding.
(01:15):
It led to the creation of anational holiday, the National
Day for Truth and Reconciliation, and eventually it brought an
unprecedented apology from PopeFrancis to Indigenous peoples in
Canada.
For many, that headline was amoment of national reckoning, a
public confirmation of whatresidential school survivors had
(01:38):
been saying for decades thatchildren went to these
institutions and never came home.
But then came the correction,or what some called a quiet
clarification these weren'tconfirmed remains.
They were possible burial sitesidentified using
ground-penetrating radar.
(01:58):
Researchers made it clearanomalies had been found, but
excavations and forensicanalysis would be required to
confirm what they were.
From that moment, the narrativesplit.
On one side, conservativecommentators like Jonathan Kaye
Candace, malcolm FrancisWidowson and Nigel Begar argued
that radar doesn't detect bones,it detects disturbances, and to
(02:23):
date no remains have beenexhumed or publicly verified in
Kamloops.
On the other side, indigenousleaders and survivors insist we
already know children died inthese schools, often buried in
unmarked graves on site Ground.
Penetrating radar, they argue,simply point to what oral
(02:43):
histories and survivor testimonyhave long told us, and whether
or not to excavate is a decisionthat belongs to the nation, not
to the media.
These two camps are miles apart, but here's the truth.
You cannot understand the 2021Kamloops story without
understanding the history thatcame before it.
So today we're going to walkthat road.
(03:06):
We'll examine the federalpolicies that created
residential schools and how theywere entangled with the Indian
Act, assimilation efforts and adeeply colonial mindset.
We'll draw from primary sourceslike the 1967 survey of
contemporary Indians of Canada,the 1972 Indian Control of
(03:27):
Indian Education Policy by theNational Indian Brotherhood, the
Royal Commission on AboriginalPeoples and Volume 4 of the
National Truth andReconciliation Commission, the
one titled Missing Children andUnmarked Burials.
That TRC volume confirmed atleast 3,200 child deaths and
(03:48):
warned the real number may befar higher.
We'll also cover the wave oflawsuits in the 1980s and 90s,
the 2006 Indian ResidentialSchool Settlement Agreement and
the public testimonies thatbegan reshaping Canada's
collective consciousness longbefore Kamloops made headlines.
Then we'll dive into the heartof the Kamloops story what has
(04:12):
been proven, what remainsuncertain, and why did one media
headline spark a globalmovement despite no bodies being
unearthed?
We'll also examine thecritiques, the concerns raised
in grave error, the differencebetween evidence and
extrapolation and the risks ofdrawing sweeping conclusions
(04:32):
without public forensicconfirmation.
But this conversation isn't justabout history.
It's about the future and whatthis controversy could mean for
First Nations governmentrelations going forward.
Because here's the real dangerIf unresolved doubt festers, if
hard questions aren't answeredand treated as heresy, if debate
(04:55):
itself becomes taboo, thenreconciliation becomes
performative, it becomes aslogan instead of a solution.
And as a First Nations chief, Isay this not to diminish the
trauma of survivors.
I've seen it in my own family.
I carry that truth with me.
But I also believe that if thestory about our people is
(05:16):
inaccurate or exaggerated, itwill hurt us in the long run,
not because it makes us look bad, but because it hands
ammunition to those who want todeny the real harms that did
happen.
Most Canadians alreadyrecognize the injustices of the
past, that empathy is real andit's earned.
(05:36):
But we risk eroding thatgoodwill if we're seen to be
building public policy on shakyground, and if we alienate
everyday Canadians with moralabsolutism or information gaps,
we push reconciliation furtherout of reach.
My goal here is simple topursue a nuanced truth, one that
(05:58):
honors survivors, respects thefacts and builds a future rooted
in both honesty and healing theHistory of First Nations in
Canada.
To understand the divide we'refacing now, you have to go back
to the beginning.
When the French first arrived inthe early 1500s, they didn't
(06:19):
have the numbers or power todominate this land outright.
They came here to trade orpower to dominate this land
outright.
They came here to trade.
The fur trade became thebackbone of early relationships
with nations like the Mi'kmaq,the Algonquin and the
Huron-Wendat and the Innu.
This wasn't just passingcontact.
The French depended onindigenous knowledge to survive
(06:39):
harsh winters, navigateunfamiliar rivers and defend
against the enemies.
Harsh winters, navigateunfamiliar rivers and defend
against the enemies.
They formed military alliances,shared ceremonies and often
intermarried, creating kinshipnetworks that over time gave
rise to the Métis people.
It was still colonialism, stillgrounded in the belief that
(07:00):
Europe's ways were superior, butat this stage it was rooted in
mutual dependence rather thanoutright domination.
The British came later and theirapproach was different.
The Hudson's Bay Company,chartered in 1670, made trade
more transactional, furs overfamily tries.
They formed political alliances, like the Covenant Chain with
(07:24):
the Haudenosaunee Confederacy.
But these were born out ofmilitary necessity, not cultural
blending.
When Britain defeated France in1763, they inherited France's
colonial claims.
And to keep the peace, kingGeorge III issued the Royal
(07:45):
Proclamation of 1763.
On paper, it recognized thatIndigenous nations held title to
their lands and could only sellto the crown, a principle still
referenced by First Nationstoday.
But paper promises mean littlewithout the will to honor them.
Over the next century,britain's view of Indigenous
(08:06):
peoples shifted from partners toproblems.
The War of 1812 was the lasttime the Crown truly relied on
Indigenous nations as allies.
Leaders like Tecumseh foughtalongside the British, trusting
promises that their lands andnations would be protected.
When the war ended, thosepromises evaporated.
(08:28):
The Treaty of Ghent didn't evenmention Indigenous rights.
By the mid-1800s, the push tocivilize was in full swing.
Settlers moved west and theBagot Commission of 1842-44
recommended educating Indigenouschildren in industrial boarding
(08:49):
schools, away from theinfluence of their families and
communities.
This was decades beforeresidential schools became
official policy, but it laid thegroundwork and blueprint.
In 1857, the GradualCivilization Act offered
citizenship and a small parcelof land to Indigenous men who
(09:09):
gave up their Indian status andtreaty rights.
Out of thousands, only one managreed.
When Confederation came in 1867,canada inherited authority over
Indians and lands reserved forIndians.
By 1876, the Indian Actcodified that control, defining
(09:31):
who is legally an Indian,imposing reserves and regulating
governance, movement andculture.
From there the residentialschool system took shape.
In 1879, prime Minister John AMacdonald backed Nicholas Flood
Davin's recommendation Afterstudying US industrial schools.
(09:52):
The Indigenous children shouldbe removed from their parents
for most of the year to beassimilated.
Macdonald put it bluntly whenthe school is on the reserve,
the child lives with its parents, who are savages.
He is simply a savage who canread and write.
Indian children should bewithdrawn as much as possible
(10:15):
from their parental influence.
By 1894, amendments to theIndian Act made attendance at
these schools compulsory forIndigenous children from age 7
to 16, with only limitedexemptions.
In 1920, the law went evenfurther, making it illegal for
status Indigenous children toattend any school other than a
(10:37):
government or church-runresidential institution.
Parents who resisted riskedhaving their children taken by
Indian agents or police.
From the 1800s until the lastschool closed in 1996, more than
150,000 Indigenous childrenwent through this system.
They were stripped of theirnames, punished for speaking
(11:01):
their languages and forbiddenfrom practicing their own
culture.
In my territory, stolo, elderSiamia Tiliot remembers sneaking
to the far side of theplayground to quietly speak her
language.
She is now the last fluentHalclamalum speaker.
Official records confirm thatat least 3,200 children died in
(11:23):
these schools, mostly fromdisease, malnutrition and
neglect, but the Truth andReconciliation Commission
believes the real number is farhigher, with death rates in some
schools exceeding those ofCanadian soldiers in wartime.
Warnings about these conditionsgo back generations.
(11:43):
In 1914, duncan Campbell Scott,the Deputy Superintendent of
Indian Affairs, admitted that50% of the children who passed
through these schools did notlive to benefit from the
education which they hadreceived therein.
He wasn't condemning the system, he was running it and
(12:06):
remaining committed to the goalof erasing Indigenous identity
from Canada's future.
What began as fragile tradealliances in the 1500s had, by
the late 19th century and early20th century, hardened into a
system designed to reshapeIndigenous peoples into a
European mold, eroding languages, breaking cultural continuity
(12:29):
and severing children from theirfamilies and communities.
It didn't happen overnight.
It was built law by law, policyby policy, over the course of
three centuries.
And to move forward we need anuanced understanding of how we
got here.
Indian Residential School TrackRecord.
(12:50):
Throughout History we knowIndian residential schools in
Canada lasted for nearly acentury and across that time,
report after report told thegovernment exactly what was
wrong, and every time theynodded and carried on.
When Dr Peter Bryce, canada'schief medical officer, reported
(13:31):
staggering mortality rates 15 to24% of children dying in the
schools, climbing to over 40% insome communities the causes
were no mystery Tuberculosis,overcrowding and appalling
sanitation Ottawa buried thatreport.
By 1922, bryce had enough.
He published the story of anational crime, openly accusing
(13:53):
the Department of Indian Affairsof criminal negligence for
allowing conditions he callednothing short of manslaughter.
His evidence was clear, hiswords impossible to misinterpret
.
And still nothing changed.
Even the churches knew.
In 1935, the United Church ofCanada ran its own commission on
Indian education.
It found widespreaddeficiencies, poor educational
(14:16):
outcomes and systemic neglect ofthe children in its care.
And yet, like Bryce's report,the findings never sparked
reform.
They stayed in the archives,gathering dust.
Almost three decades later, in1967, the federal government
commissioned anthropologistHarry Hawthorne to produce a
(14:36):
survey of the contemporaryIndians of Canada.
In it, indigenous peoples weredescribed as Citizens Plus,
entitled not only to the samerights as other Canadians but
also to their treaty rights.
Hawthorne flat out criticizedresidential schools for poor
results and recommended localcontrol and a shift to day
(14:59):
schools.
It didn't shut the system down,but it began nudging Ottawa
towards integrating Indigenousstudents into provincial schools
.
By the late 1960s, and asfederal archives confirmed, most
churches wanted out.
Running these schools wascostly, controversial and
increasingly indefensible.
In 1969, the federal governmenttook over from the churches.
(15:23):
Then in 1972, the NationalIndian Brotherhood released
Indian Control of IndianEducation.
The title said it all andOttawa agreed in 1973.
New enrollments in residentialschools began to drop sharply,
but change wasn't coming fastenough for survivors still in
(15:46):
the system.
By the mid-1980s and into theearly 1990s, survivors were
organizing, supporting oneanother and, as court records
showed, launching class actionlawsuits.
In October 1990, phil Fontaine,grand Chief of the Assembly of
(16:06):
Manitoba Chiefs, publiclydescribed the abuse he had
endured.
That speech was a turning point, the moment the silence started
to break and the 1990s provedthe abuse wasn't just history.
In Kamloops, an employee of theKamloops Indian Residential
School was charged with severaldozen sex crimes committed on
(16:29):
site.
He pled guilty and served aboutthree years in prison, as later
described in TRC testimony.
Survivors recalled nighttimeassaults, the abuser moving
through dorms with a flashlight.
In Saskatchewan, william Starr,administrator of the Gordon
(16:49):
Indian Residential School from1968 to 1984, admitted to
sexually abusing potentiallyhundreds of boys.
In 1993, he was sentenced to4.5 years for sexually
assaulting 10 of them.
That same period saw hundredsof lawsuits filed and over 200
(17:11):
complaints settled by Ottawa.
Then came 1996, the Royalcommission on aboriginal peoples
, a massive, multi-volume report, concluded that residential
schools were a central elementin the cultural genocide of
aboriginal peoples.
It called for healinginitiatives, community
(17:31):
controlled education and publicacknowledgement of the harm.
That same year, the lastfederally run school, gordon
Indian Residential School,closed.
And no, there was no sweepinggovernment apology.
By 2001,.
The Office of IndianResidential Schools Resolution
(17:51):
Canada was created to handle theflood of abuse claims.
That led to the 2006 IndianResidential Schools Settlement
Agreement, the largest classaction settlement in Canadian
history, and, crucially, thecreation of the Truth and
Reconciliation Commission.
The TRC began work in 2008, andfrom 2009 to 2015, it traveled
(18:16):
to every province and territory,hosted public and private
hearings, gathered over 6,000survivor statements and
collected mountains of archivalevidence.
In 2015, it released multiplevolumes and 94 calls to action.
The findings were unflinchingcalls to action.
(18:41):
The findings were unflinching.
The TRC concluded the systemwas a cultural genocide, a
deliberate policy to eraseIndigenous languages,
spirituality and ways of life,forcing assimilation into
Euro-Canadian society.
Over 150,000 First Nations Inuit.
Over 150,000 First NationsInuit and Métis children
(19:04):
attended these schools betweenthe 1800s and 1996.
Survivors described widespreadphysical, sexual and emotional
abuse, harsh discipline, poorsanitation, malnutrition and
unsafe living conditions.
Beatings for speaking one'slanguage this is a quote.
If we were caught speaking ourlanguage, they would make us
(19:26):
kneel on the floor for hours,sometimes with a pencil under
our knees.
The pain was unbearable.
They wanted to make sure weforgot who we were.
Survivor Testimony TRC Volume.
Final Report, volume 5.
Sexual abuse by staff wasreported.
Here is a quote.
(19:47):
I was eight when the prieststarted coming into my bed at
night.
I didn't understand what washappening.
If I cried he would tell me Iwas going to hell and no one
would believe me.
I never told my parents until Iwas in my 50s.
That's survivor testimony inthe final report.
(20:07):
Malnutrition experiments.
Here's a quote from this.
We were always hungry.
They told us we were part of anexperiment.
We didn't know what that meant,just that food was bad and
there wasn't enough.
My teeth bled for years.
Testimony from former AlberniIndian Residential School
(20:28):
student documented in IanMosby's research Classmates
disappearing.
Here's a quote One morning thelittle boy who slept in the bed
next to mine was gone.
They told us he was sent home,but his parents never saw him
again.
I found out many years later hehad died and was buried behind
(20:51):
the school.
Survivor testimony from the TRCmissing children and unmarked
burials volume Cultural eraser.
From the TRC Missing Childrenand Unmarked Burials volume
Cultural Eraser.
They cut my hair the day Iarrived.
They told me my name was nogood and gave me a number.
I wasn't allowed to see mybrother, even though he was in
(21:12):
the same building.
We stopped being family themoment we got there.
That's survivor testimony fromthe TRC final report.
At least 3,200 children areknown to have died but, as the
TRC's Missing Children andUnmarked Burials volume makes
clear, there was no organizedeffort to record deaths across
(21:33):
the system.
The National Student DeathRegister is far from complete.
Many documents remainunreviewed, others were
inconsistently reported and somewere destroyed entirely.
Other estimates place the realnumber between 4,100 and 6,500.
The TRC also documented thesuppression of languages, the
(21:57):
dismantling of culturaltransmission and the
intergenerational trauma thatfollowed Cycles of mental health
struggles, substance use andfamily breakdown.
And those 94 calls to action?
They range from child welfareto education, language
revitalization, justice reformand commemoration.
(22:18):
The point and the TRC itselfstressed this is that this
wasn't the work of a few badapples.
It was a planned governmentpolicy carried out in
partnership with churches formore than a century.
The last school closed lessthan 30 years ago.
(22:40):
Survivor testimony was centralto the TRC's work and their
voices are now part of Canada'shistorical record.
But even the commission warnedwhen testimony is prioritized
over documentary records, thetruth becomes vulnerable to
denial.
That's why both matter thestories and the hard evidence,
(23:01):
because without both, the truthcan be picked apart.
In December 2015, the TRCcompleted its work and released
its final report, concludingthat the residential school
system amounted to a culturalgenocide.
Just two months earlier, justinTrudeau had been elected prime
minister.
Sworn in, on November 4th,still in his political honeymoon
(23:25):
, he walked into the TRC's finalreport release on December 15th
.
In his speech that day, trudeauacknowledged the gravity of the
TRC's conclusions that what hadbeen done to Indigenous children
and communities was not justwrong but part of a deliberate
policy to erase languages,cultures and identities.
And he didn't just offersymbolic gestures.
(23:48):
He committed to fullyimplementing all 94 calls to
action directed at the federalgovernment, promising to do it
in partnership with Indigenouscommunities.
He pledged a national inquiryinto missing and murdered
Indigenous women and girls oneof the calls to action and
elevated reconciliation to whathe called a sacred obligation
(24:09):
for his government.
In the years that followed, hisgovernment took some steps
formally adopting the UnitedNations Declaration on the
Rights of Indigenous Peoplesinto law, creating the National
Council for Reconciliation andpassing legislation to protect
Indigenous languages.
But progress was uneven.
Many calls to action remainunfinished.
(24:30):
Even among allies, praise wascautious.
Former TRC chair MurraySinclair welcomed the
commitments but pressed forfaster, tangible results.
Still in those early days, themomentum felt.
Real Reports showed realopportunities to improve living
conditions for First Nations andTrudeau seemed eager, even
(24:53):
determined, to be the one tolead the change.
The Mass Graves Story.
With all of that history, nowlet's get to the mass grave
story and the rise in so-calledIndian residential school
denialism.
In May 2021, tecumelups,tecequepemc First Nation made an
announcement that would ignitenational and international
(25:15):
attention.
They revealed the results of aground-penetrating radar survey
at the site of the formerKamloops Indian Residential
School in British Columbia.
The work was led byanthropologist and GPR
specialist, sarah Boulot fromthe University of the Fraser
Valley.
Kamloops was not a smallinstitution.
(25:37):
It was one of the largestresidential schools in Canada,
operated by the Catholic Churchfrom 1890 until 1978.
Preliminary ground penetratingradar scans identified what were
interpreted as the remains ofan estimated 215 children in
unmarked graves.
Many of these children werebelieved to be very young, with
(26:00):
some claiming that they would bearound the age of three at the
time of death.
Young, with some claiming thatthey would be around the age of
three at the time of death.
The locations aligned withsurvivor testimony.
Stories told for decades aboutchildren who had died at the
school and were buried withoutmarkers, without records and
without families being told.
As Sarah Boulot explained inher July 2021 public statement,
(26:22):
these were not mass graves inthe sense of a single large pit,
but rather individual or smallgroup burial sites in an orchard
area used by the school, andshe stressed that the results
were preliminary.
Ground penetrating radar doesnot produce an image of bones or
bodies.
(26:42):
It detects soil disturbances,anomalies consistent with grave
shafts, but confirmation wouldrequire excavation, which had
not been done.
This announcement wassignificant.
It became the first majorground-penetrating radar finding
publicized as part of a growingnational effort to locate
(27:03):
missing children fromresidential schools, following
the National Truth andReconciliation Commission's 2015
report.
The news prompted calls foraccountability, federal funding
for more searches and furtherinvestigations across Canada.
Survivors said the resultsconfirmed what they had been
telling governments and churchesfor generations that children
(27:25):
had died and their deaths werehidden.
It's important to note thatground penetrating radar is not
experimental guesswork.
It's a well-establishedarchaeological tool used
globally to locate unmarkedgraves.
It's been applied inbattlefield archaeology to
(27:45):
locate unmarked graves.
It's been applied inbattlefield archaeology,
holocaust research at sites likeTreblinka and in indigenous
grave repatriation projects inCanada, australia and New
Zealand.
In Canada, ground-penetratingradar had already been used in
RCMP cold cases and historiccemetery research before
Kamloops.
(28:08):
What made the Kamloops findingscompelling to experts was the
pattern.
As Boulot explained, theanomalies had a consistent size
and shape, small grave shaftsmatching the dimension of
children's burials.
They showed regular spacingdepth consistent with the
historical burial period,regular spacing depth consistent
with the historical burialperiod, and they were in the
precise orchard locationsurvivors had identified decades
(28:29):
earlier as the burial site theway that they are shaped, the
way that they are positioned,their size and their depth is
consistent with burials, shesaid, as reported by the CBC
News.
Still, limitations remain.
No excavation has been carriedout, partly due to cultural
(28:49):
protocols, legal considerationsand community decision-making.
Some argue that withoutphysical remains, the findings
are unproven, but the Tekemloops, tsekewetmik and many
archaeologists counter that inIndigenous-led research, oral
history and non-invasivetechnology are valid evidence,
(29:11):
especially when government andchurch records are incomplete or
have been destroyed.
After Kamloops, the federalgovernment pledged funding for
similar searches at other formerresidential school sites.
Dozens of communities havesince undertaken
ground-penetrating radar surveys, many reporting additional
anomalies consistent withhundreds more potential unmarked
(29:32):
graves.
The Catholic Church whichoperated Kamloops faced renewed
calls for a formal apology andfull access to records.
The announcement alsoaccelerated national
conversations, from loweringflags on federal buildings to
establishing the National Dayfor Truth and Reconciliation.
(29:52):
But the story also drew critics,several of whom I've
interviewed on this show.
Journalist Jonathan Kaye,writing in Quillette in 2022,
argued that the media's framing,using phrases like discovery of
human remains and mass graves,overstated the facts.
Kay noted that groundpenetrating radar detects ground
(30:15):
disturbances, not bodies, andthat no remains had been exhumed
.
In his view, the coveragebecame a national social panic
where reporters repeated oneanother's framing without
caution or correction.
He's called for carefulverification before making
definitive claims, stressingthat tragedies in residential
(30:36):
school history are real.
But premature conclusionsundermine trust.
Sure conclusions underminetrust.
Nigel Begar, another past guest, argued in a December 2024
essay titled Grievances PoliticsFuels New Era of Fake History
that the Kamloops story fit intoa broader Western pattern of
(30:57):
media-driven moral panic andretrospective colonial guilt.
Candace Malcolm, also a formerguest, was among the earliest
and loudest voices questioningthe Kamloops narrative.
She's described the coverage asone of the most destructive
fake news narratives in Canadianhistory.
Milcom points to the absence ofexhumed remains, the
(31:20):
speculative nature of thereports and cases where
anomalies were later found to bein established cemeteries.
She often cites laterexcavations at Pine Creek and
Kamso Hospital, where no humanremains were found, as
vindication for her skepticism.
In her view, the moral andpolitical fallout from the
(31:43):
initial reporting, includingvandalism at churches, the
cancellation of Canada Dayevents and the creation of a
national holiday, weredisproportionate to the
unconfirmed evidence.
Malcolm also contributed to andpromoted grave error how the
media misled us and the TruthAbout Residential Schools a 2023
(32:05):
anthology edited by CP Championand Tom Flanagan.
The book compiles essays fromjournalists, academics and
commentators who argue thatCanadian media and political
leaders overstated aspects ofthe unmarked graves narrative.
The contributors question theinterpretation of ground
(32:25):
penetrating radar results,criticize what they see as
political exploitation of thestory and challenge elements of
residential school history asframed by the National Truth and
Reconciliation Commission.
Supporters say it's a necessarycorrective.
Critics say it's downplayingsurvivor experiences and
(32:45):
undermining reconciliation.
So the Kamloops story sits atthe intersection of history,
technology, survivor testimonyand public trust.
For many Indigenous communitiesit was a validation of
long-ignored truths.
For others it was a case studyin the dangers of media
amplification without physicalverification.
(33:08):
And for the country it becameone of the most consequential
and contested moments in theongoing conversation about
Canada's residential schoollegacy the fallout.
Here's the divide.
As I understand it, if you'releft-leaning, you tend to trust
the CBC, you trust the NationalTruth and Reconciliation
(33:30):
Commission, you trust and knowthat Stephen Harper and the Pope
apologized and you trust thearchaeologists, which leads you
to believe the claim is true and, as mentioned earlier, per the
National Truth andReconciliation Commission's
final report, at least 3,200children are known to have died
in residential schools.
(33:50):
But here's the thing as foundin the TRC's Missing Children
and Unmarked Burials volume.
There was no organized effortto record deaths across the
entire system.
The National Student DeathRegister is far from complete,
with many documents stillunreviewed.
Death counts remain unknownbecause of incomplete records,
(34:11):
inconsistent reporting and, insome cases, outright destruction
of files.
Other estimates place the realnumber between 4,100 and 6,500.
So when the 215 anomalies inKamloops were reported in 2021,
for many that was seen asevidence confirming what the TRC
(34:32):
already said that records wereincomplete and that the actual
number could be much higher.
If you're right-leaning, you seeit differently.
You question why the CBC, newYork Times and Washington Post
made such a bold claim withoutdefinitive proof, then why they
(34:52):
quietly changed or updated theirwording.
You note that thearchaeologists are pointing to
ground-penetrating radarreadings, not to confirmed
remains of children, not toconfirmed remains of children.
You ask why culture andemotions seem to outweigh hard
evidence, especially when thisis an extraordinary claim that,
in your view, requiresextraordinary proof.
(35:12):
You question the dramaticpolitical and financial response
, including a $246 millioncommunity fund.
You point out that the TRCrelies heavily on survivor
testimony rather than only coldstatistical data, and you ask
why, four years later, therehave been no excavations.
(35:34):
If you're right-leaning, you'realso likely conservative.
And what does it mean to be aconservative?
At its core, it means you wantto conserve, to preserve history
, culture and the stories wetell ourselves.
So when the CBC broke the 215unmarked graves story, and
churches were burned orvandalized in the aftermath, the
(35:56):
conservative reaction waspredictable through that lens.
That's why it's important to beaware of the instinct towards
conservation when reviewingcomplex, important topics,
because it shapes how youinterpret the facts.
The reality is, ground surveyshave revealed numerous potential
burial sites, but human remainshave only been confirmed in a
(36:19):
very few cases, and often notthrough targeted excavations.
Now here's where theconversation gets heated.
People who question the 2021story are often accused of being
Indian residential schooldeniers.
There are two problems withthat, to start with.
First, it's inaccurate.
These people aren't denyingthat residential schools existed
(36:42):
or that they caused harm.
These people aren't denyingthat residential schools existed
or that they caused harm.
They're questioning a specificclaim.
Second, the term is politicallyloaded, deliberately echoing
Holocaust denier.
And here's the strange part Eventhe CBC admits the definition
doesn't actually mean someonedenies the existence of the
school system.
(37:02):
Mean someone denies theexistence of the school system.
In a March 17th 2025 article,cbc journalist Samantha
Schweintek wrote.
Residential school denialismdoes not deny the existence of
the school system, but ratherdownplays, excuses or
misinterprets facts about theharms caused by it, experts say.
The experts she cites are DrDaniel Heath Justice and Dr Sean
(37:26):
Carlton, professors andco-authors of Truth Before
Reconciliation Eight Ways toIdentify and Confront
Residential School Denialism,and they use the same definition
.
Here's the problem when youredefine a loaded term so it no
longer matches its plain meaning, you turn the debate into a
(37:46):
political weapon.
It's like calling someone amurderer then saying well, I
define murderer as anyone who'sever killed a bug.
You'd be right to see that asbad faith and manipulative.
Calling someone a denier, thenadmitting they're not actually
denying the thing in question,does exactly that.
It frustrates, it confuses andit poisons the conversation.
(38:09):
That framing is part of whythis has gotten so political.
You have people like formerCrown Indigenous Relations
Minister Gary Anansangare, ndpMP Leah Ghazan and some survivor
groups advocating for a law tomake denialism a criminal
offense.
Under their proposed bill,anyone other than in private who
(38:33):
condones, denies or downplaysor justifies the Indian
residential school system ormisrepresents facts related to
it could face up to two years inprison, and the denier label
has been used in real world waysthat damage reputations.
In Quesnel, for example, themayor's wife was accused of
(38:53):
distributing a book promotingresidential school denialism the
same grave error book we'vediscussed before and the mayor
was condemned by his own counciland the Union of BC Indian
Chiefs.
The reality is this story iscomplicated.
The nations themselves areoften choosing not to release
(39:13):
certain evidence, and that isabsolutely their right.
But if that's the case, thenit's not unreasonable for people
to remain skeptical.
The case, then it's notunreasonable for people to
remain skeptical.
Respecting a nation's right toprivacy comes with the caveat
that conclusions will draw, thatpeople will choose their own
conclusions.
When Minister Gary Anand Sangrecame on my show, as well as past
(39:37):
guests like Candace Malcolm andformer Indigenous Services
Canada Minister Patti Hajdu, Itold them that criminalizing
denialism is a very bad idea.
First, because people have aright to freedom of expression.
Second, because doing so willonly deepen the divide between
First Nations and the rest ofCanada.
Third, that the term denierdoesn't reflect its plain
(40:00):
meaning.
And lastly, because we don'thave all the evidence needed to
justify such a law.
Here's my clip with MinisterGary Anansangare and Patti Hajdu
on criminalizing denialism.
The other conversation is aroundthe caps on Indian residential
school searches and the fundingfor that.
(40:21):
Now I just want to betransparent.
I've had multiple conversationswith people various on the
political spectrum.
I've spoken to Chief WillieSellers from Williams Lake First
Nation.
We talked about his communityand the actual searches that may
go on in his community.
Michael Moses, who's runningfor the BCNDP, but I've also
spoken to individuals likeCandace Malcolm from True North
(40:43):
Media about her perspective andthe book that her organization,
true North, released, sayingthat perhaps there aren't these
unmarked graves, that the CBCstory that was initially
reported has some problems withit.
One discovered there's theseabnormalities that may be bodies
and I'm wondering how youprocess this story.
(41:09):
And then how do you decideyou've removed the caps on that
search?
How did you come to thatdecision?
Gary Anandasanagree (41:16):
You know I was at Williams Lake.
I was at, you know we did.
I was at Williams Lake lastyear around this time I met with
Charlene Bellew, who is veryinvolved with the work of St
Joseph's Residential Schools.
I walked the ground and youknow this was was about three,
(41:43):
four in the afternoon by thetime I finished and I had so
many other things to do that day.
Um, I just went to the hoteland I had to shut down and I
have not felt like that in anyother day in this role and I had
to shut down because the, theemotion was so overwhelming and
the impact that just evenwalking and understanding and
(42:06):
understanding the stories justum, just crushed me right.
Um.
And for anyone to suggest that,um, you know we, we can't accept
residential school, but that'stook place, that young people
didn't go home, families didn'thave their kids back, I think
it's absolute nonsense and it isthe type of hatred, in my
(42:31):
opinion, that warrants criminalreview.
And almost when we talk aboutHolocaust denial or denialism of
any major event, I thinkgenocide.
I think this is at that pointwhere it should be part of
Canadian criminal law to be ableto talk about those who deny
(42:55):
that this happened.
The work I think that's beingundertaken by the community is a
verification process to see youknow if, if there are um bodies
that can be found, uh, or thatcan be exhumed, that can be, uh,
you know, tested um, and everysingle one of those steps takes
buy-in from the community, takescommitment, it takes, frankly,
(43:20):
the, the, the understanding ofyou know what they're going to
be able to live with when theydo that search, and everyone
will have different decisionpoints and everyone will not
have the same outcome, butultimately everyone deserves
change to undertake this processif and when they're ready.
(43:43):
Well, I can see the foundationof why that bill has been
proposed.
I mean, ultimately, at the endof the day, it's extremely
hurtful to individuals,especially individuals with an
experience in residential school, which is many, if not most,
individuals in this countryIndigenous, sorry, first Nations
, indigenous people in thiscountry, and so I understand the
(44:04):
motive behind it.
The government's still studyingthat bill to see whether or not
and of course, it's not even indebate yet.
But eventually the governmentwill decide about whether it
supports the bill or not andwhether or not there's other
legislation that you know isduplicative.
For example, we do have hatespeech laws in this country.
Are they enough?
So, you know, ultimately, atthe end of the day, I would say,
(44:27):
stay tuned for a decision fromthe government, but what I would
say that the government agreeswith is that the experience of
denialism is very painful forpeople that are, you know,
mourning the loss of theirfamily, mourning the impact of
their parents and the experienceof their parents on their own
(44:48):
lives.
There's just so much loss andgrief in this space that you
know.
What I hope is that Canadiansincreasingly want to understand
and be compassionate to thehealing journey that First
Nations people are on.
Aaron Pete (45:05):
And I'm consistent about this.
When a Vancouver theologyschool tried to cancel a lecture
by Nigel Begar, a past guest,because he was labeled a denier,
I reached out to the organizers.
I told them I'd be happy toattend to question Begar
directly and that, while Idisagree with some of his views,
I believe he has the right tospeak and that his views have a
(45:27):
right to be challenged.
Because I'm about as close to afree speech absolutist as you
can get.
I did attend that event.
I engaged with him respectfullyand, despite where we disagree,
I still respect him as athinker who's willing to show up
and defend his position in anopen conversation.
That said, I also see the otherside.
(45:51):
Some people do try and downplaythe harm of residential schools
unnecessarily.
When I spoke with CandaceMalcolm, for example, she
acknowledged that bad thingshappened and that the policy
failed, but did argue that theintentions were good and that
there are good stories that comefrom them.
Candice Malcolm (46:08):
Here's that conversation with Candace
Malcolm.
So like a bunch of—so thegovernment recruited a bunch of
murderers to go off and likekill kids, like I just am trying
to understand the accusationbecause, again, like because
we're writing about this, it's asuper controversial topic.
I've heard from a lot ofCanadians.
I really respect what you'resaying and I'm happy to continue
this conversation as long asyou want because I think I can
learn from you in this instancebecause you're a lot more
connected to it than I.
But I've heard from people whosay you know, there was an
(46:31):
Indian residential school in mycommunity and they got more
money than the public schools orthe Catholic schools and they
had more resources and they hadbetter teachers and they had
nicer buildings.
They had better teachers andthey had nicer buildings.
And I've talked to people whowere graduates of these
residential schools and they saythat it changed their life and
it made them on a better pathtowards succeeding in a modern
(46:52):
economy.
So like there's two sides to it,right, it's like I'm sure a lot
of people went to school andhad a miserable experience and
they were homesick and they weresad.
A lot of people really wantedtheir children to attend these
schools because they saw it asan opportunity for betterment.
Like I said, the schoolsweren't compulsory, they weren't
mandatory.
They weren't going and scoopingpeople up from their house,
(47:13):
despite there's a sort of athought that that was happening,
that the Canadian police weregoing door to door and scooping
kids up and taking them to theseschools.
That's a myth, as far as I canunderstand.
People wanted the schools andsure, like in any environment,
there's going to be an abuse ofpower.
There's going to be.
There was abuse and there washorrible, unspeakable abuse and
it's tragic and anyone who wasinvolved in that should be held
(47:36):
accountable.
There's a reason we got rid ofthis program.
It obviously failed.
It didn't work, although somepeople did benefit from it.
Aaron Pete (47:43):
And Nigel Bagar argued that First Nation
communities often asked forIndian residential schools and
the mass grave story connotesmurder and that it created a
moral panic.
Nigel Biggar (47:59):
Here's that clip.
Well, as you say, aaron, therewas this claim back in three
years ago in Kamloops, based onground penetrating radar that
revealed there'd been earthmovements under the ground and
it was assumed these were themass graves of Indian kids,
(48:21):
undiscovered, unknown.
And, of course, to use the wordmass graves, which is the
phrase that was used in thepress by the New York Times and
Al Jazeera, does connote massmurder.
And then, subsequently, therewere multiple similar claims.
And then you had the peoplestarting to burn down Catholic
(48:47):
churches I think 83 had beenburned down to date, because
some of these schools were runby Catholic religious orders and
as of now, there is no evidenceof mass graves, there's no
evidence that whoever is inthose graves was murdered and
(49:08):
actually, in some cases they'renot even unknown.
In other words, they arerecorded, it's just that the
grave markers have worn away anddon't exist.
A lot of the graves wereactually recorded in the Truth
and Reconciliation Commissionreport.
So right now, from myperspective, it seems as if the
(49:31):
panic, the moral panic aboutmass killings of First Nations
kids is not true, and thatraises the question as to why
was it propagated and why didthe I mean the journalists have
a duty to interrogate claims andto assess evidence, and it
(49:57):
seems they didn't.
And now that the evidencesuggests that, I mean it's
possible, it's possible.
Someone will yet dig up thegrave, the unknown graves of
kids who were abused or killed.
Possible, but it hasn'thappened.
That's three years.
If that's the case, why aren'tthose who put about this myth
(50:21):
only up to it?
Why don't we read about it innewspapers?
I guess people are beingcautious to see, but correct me
if I'm wrong.
Right now it looks as if theclaims were not true.
Is that true?
Aaron Pete (50:34):
The important takeaway is that the mass grave
story does not claim that thechildren were murdered, which is
the angle Candice and Nigelhave misunderstood or
misinterpreted.
The TRC is very clear that itwas often due to tuberculosis,
poor living conditions and lackof nutrition.
(50:54):
But both Candice and Nigel wereopen to having a conversation.
And here's the thing Dr SeanCarlton and I debated on X.
He accused me of carrying waterfor Indian residential school
deniers by speaking with them onmy show, despite the fact that
I've interviewed many on theright and left on this issue.
(51:16):
I've spoken with governmentofficials, journalists, first
Nation leaders and media punditswith varying perspectives First
Nation leaders and mediapundits with varying
perspectives.
I believe they have every rightto question things, but they
should also understand the livedimpact.
From where I sit, this debateis dividing First Nations and
(51:37):
everyday Canadians more than itneeds to.
On the left, you have peoplepushing to criminalize
skepticism.
On the right, you have peoplebeing unnecessarily
unsympathetic to Indigenoushistory.
So here's my position Ifnations want to continue making
these public claims, they shouldbe willing to back them up with
(51:57):
evidence.
If you're skeptical on theright, I challenge you to read
the survivors' stories and putyourself in their shoes of a
First Nations family, becausefor us this is not a debate, an
abstract political debate.
I'm the chief of my First Nation.
My grandmother attended StMary's Indian Residential School
(52:18):
where she was abused soseverely that she struggled with
alcohol for the rest of herlife so severely that she
struggled with alcohol for therest of her life.
My aunt and several people Iwork with also went to St Mary's
the same school Siamia Tillyattended, who is now the last
fluent Halclamalum speaker.
My mother was born with fetalalcohol syndrome disorder
(52:39):
because of my grandmother'sdrinking the cycle trauma
leading to substance use becauseof my grandmother's drinking
the cycle trauma leading tosubstance use leading to more
trauma still affects manyfamilies in my community and
throughout Canada.
So, yes, there may be validquestions about the 215
anomalies in Kamloops, but thatdoesn't erase the documented
abuse, the poor livingconditions and the thousands of
(53:01):
confirmed child deaths that theTRC called the low estimate.
And we need to be aware thatthis fight over words and claims
is starting to hurt FirstNations politically.
In BC, conservative leader JohnRustad had party members
accused of being deniers.
Mla Dallas Brody, leader ofOneBC, has been campaigning on
(53:23):
the idea that First Nations gettoo much support.
Federally, reconciliationdidn't crack the top five issues
in the last election.
Prime Minister Mark Carney isnowhere near as focused on
Indigenous issues as JustinTrudeau was.
And now Indigenous Services.
Canada is facing a $5 billionbudget reduction and 15% cuts
(53:45):
over the next three years, which, in my view, means losing an
investment our communities can'tafford to lose.
That's the landscape we're in,and if we don't find a way to
bridge this divide, it's onlygoing to get worse.
Conclusion In the end, the 2021mass, grave story has become
(54:07):
less about evidence and moreabout the political and cultural
trenches it has carved.
On the one side are those whosee it as confirmation of what
survivors have been saying foryears, a painful truth that must
be faced head on.
On the other are those whoquestion the proof, the
reporting and the politicalcapital it has generated.
(54:29):
What gets lost in thatcrossfire is the human reality.
For First Nations families likemine, the harms of residential
schools are not up for debate.
They're lived experience.
Schools are not up for debate.
They're lived experience.
They show up in the scars ourparents and grandparents carried
in, the trauma that stillshapes our communities, in the
(54:51):
economic and educationalbarriers we continue to face,
whether the number is 3,200,4,100, or more, each figure
represents a child who nevermade it home.
That's why this conversationneeds less grandstanding and
more honesty.
If public claims are made, theevidence must be provided openly
(55:13):
.
If hard questions are asked,they must be paired with a
willingness to confront the fullscope of the truth.
Criminalizing debate will deependivides.
Denying history will compoundthe harm.
Reconciliation cannot rest onselective truth.
If we only tell the parts ofthe story that fit our politics,
(55:36):
whether to defend a narrativeor to attack it, we fail the
generations who lived thishistory.
It takes courage to hold griefand skepticism in the same hand,
to honor survivors' pain whileinsisting on transparency, to
demand accuracy withoutabandoning empathy, and to
(55:58):
defend free expression withouterasing the suffering that
brought us here.
We cannot criminalize questions.
It makes the truth look weakand fuels distrust, and we
cannot deny history.
It reopens wounds that neverhealed.
Those who demand silence in thename of sensitivity risk
(56:20):
alienating Canadians who mightotherwise stand with us.
Those who downplay the abuse,death and cultural destruction
risk proving survivors rightwhen they say their pain is
minimized.
The only way forward is to tellthe whole truth, even when it's
messy, incomplete anduncomfortable.
(56:41):
The truth is.
The TRC makes it clear thereare likely unmarked graves, and
the areas where groundpenetrating radar found
anomalies are an obvious placeto start.
But if a nation chooses not toexcavate and provide evidence,
then voices like Dallas Brody,candace, malcolm Francis,
widowson and others have everyright to raise questions,
(57:04):
express doubt and challenge thestory.
That's what accountability isholding institutions,
governments and media to astandard of accuracy and holding
ourselves to a standard ofcompassion.
If we fail to do that, the gapbetween First Nations and the
rest of Canada will onlycontinue to widen until
(57:25):
reconciliation is nothing morethan a hollow political slogan.
But if we do it, if we demandtruth while showing respect,
then maybe, maybe, just maybe,we can replace mistrust with
understanding and buildsomething strong enough for us
to all carry forward.
Nuance isn't weakness, it'sstrength.
(57:48):
It's how we protect both memoryand integrity.
It's how we move from symbolicreconciliation to meaningful
change.
I'm a First Nations chief.
I've seen intergenerationalpain.
I've also seen what happenswhen media, politicians or
activists oversimplify ourstories for clicks, for grants
(58:09):
or for ideological gain.
That does not help us.
It turns our history into aweapon, one that's just as
likely to backfire.
So this is the challenge forall of us.
Tell the truth, the whole truth, not just the parts that feel
good or are convenient.
Don't shut down dissent.
(58:29):
Don't weaponize grief and don'tassume that pain justifies bad
reporting, because the only wayto build real reconciliation is
to build it on truth documented,confirmed, accountable and
human.
That's how we earn trust,that's how we honor survivors
and that's how we build a futureworth fighting for.
Right now, canada is caught in a growing emotional
debate, A debate over so-calledIndian residential school
denialism and the unmarkedgraves believed to exist at
former Indian residential schoolsites.
On May 29, 2021, a headlinefrom CBC stopped the country in
(00:54):
its tracks Remains of 215children found buried at former
BC residential school FirstNations say the story went
global.
It sparked vigils, churcharsons, parliamentary motions
and more than $246 million insurvivor-focused funding.
(01:15):
It led to the creation of anational holiday, the National
Day for Truth and Reconciliation, and eventually it brought an
unprecedented apology from PopeFrancis to Indigenous peoples in
Canada.
For many, that headline was amoment of national reckoning, a
public confirmation of whatresidential school survivors had
(01:38):
been saying for decades thatchildren went to these
institutions and never came home.
But then came the correction,or what some called a quiet
clarification these weren'tconfirmed remains.
They were possible burial sitesidentified using
ground-penetrating radar.
(01:58):
Researchers made it clearanomalies had been found, but
excavations and forensicanalysis would be required to
confirm what they were.
From that moment, the narrativesplit.
On one side, conservativecommentators like Jonathan Kaye
Candace, malcolm FrancisWidowson and Nigel Begar argued
that radar doesn't detect bones,it detects disturbances, and to
(02:23):
date no remains have beenexhumed or publicly verified in
Kamloops.
On the other side, indigenousleaders and survivors insist we
already know children died inthese schools, often buried in
unmarked graves on site Ground.
Penetrating radar, they argue,simply point to what oral
(02:43):
histories and survivor testimonyhave long told us, and whether
or not to excavate is a decisionthat belongs to the nation, not
to the media.
These two camps are miles apart, but here's the truth.
You cannot understand the 2021Kamloops story without
understanding the history thatcame before it.
So today we're going to walkthat road.
(03:06):
We'll examine the federalpolicies that created
residential schools and how theywere entangled with the Indian
Act, assimilation efforts and adeeply colonial mindset.
We'll draw from primary sourceslike the 1967 survey of
contemporary Indians of Canada,the 1972 Indian Control of
(03:27):
Indian Education Policy by theNational Indian Brotherhood, the
Royal Commission on AboriginalPeoples and Volume 4 of the
National Truth andReconciliation Commission, the
one titled Missing Children andUnmarked Burials.
That TRC volume confirmed atleast 3,200 child deaths and
(03:48):
warned the real number may befar higher.
We'll also cover the wave oflawsuits in the 1980s and 90s,
the 2006 Indian ResidentialSchool Settlement Agreement and
the public testimonies thatbegan reshaping Canada's
collective consciousness longbefore Kamloops made headlines.
Then we'll dive into the heartof the Kamloops story what has
(04:12):
been proven, what remainsuncertain, and why did one media
headline spark a globalmovement despite no bodies being
unearthed?
We'll also examine thecritiques, the concerns raised
in grave error, the differencebetween evidence and
extrapolation and the risks ofdrawing sweeping conclusions
(04:32):
without public forensicconfirmation.
But this conversation isn't justabout history.
It's about the future and whatthis controversy could mean for
First Nations governmentrelations going forward.
Because here's the real dangerIf unresolved doubt festers, if
hard questions aren't answeredand treated as heresy, if debate
(04:55):
itself becomes taboo, thenreconciliation becomes
performative, it becomes aslogan instead of a solution.
And as a First Nations chief, Isay this not to diminish the
trauma of survivors.
I've seen it in my own family.
I carry that truth with me.
But I also believe that if thestory about our people is
(05:16):
inaccurate or exaggerated, itwill hurt us in the long run,
not because it makes us look bad, but because it hands
ammunition to those who want todeny the real harms that did
happen.
Most Canadians alreadyrecognize the injustices of the
past, that empathy is real andit's earned.
(05:36):
But we risk eroding thatgoodwill if we're seen to be
building public policy on shakyground, and if we alienate
everyday Canadians with moralabsolutism or information gaps,
we push reconciliation furtherout of reach.
My goal here is simple topursue a nuanced truth, one that
(05:58):
honors survivors, respects thefacts and builds a future rooted
in both honesty and healing theHistory of First Nations in
Canada.
To understand the divide we'refacing now, you have to go back
to the beginning.
When the French first arrived inthe early 1500s, they didn't
(06:19):
have the numbers or power todominate this land outright.
They came here to trade orpower to dominate this land
outright.
They came here to trade.
The fur trade became thebackbone of early relationships
with nations like the Mi'kmaq,the Algonquin and the
Huron-Wendat and the Innu.
This wasn't just passingcontact.
The French depended onindigenous knowledge to survive
(06:39):
harsh winters, navigateunfamiliar rivers and defend
against the enemies.
Harsh winters, navigateunfamiliar rivers and defend
against the enemies.
They formed military alliances,shared ceremonies and often
intermarried, creating kinshipnetworks that over time gave
rise to the Métis people.
It was still colonialism, stillgrounded in the belief that
(07:00):
Europe's ways were superior, butat this stage it was rooted in
mutual dependence rather thanoutright domination.
The British came later and theirapproach was different.
The Hudson's Bay Company,chartered in 1670, made trade
more transactional, furs overfamily tries.
They formed political alliances, like the Covenant Chain with
(07:24):
the Haudenosaunee Confederacy.
But these were born out ofmilitary necessity, not cultural
blending.
When Britain defeated France in1763, they inherited France's
colonial claims.
And to keep the peace, kingGeorge III issued the Royal
(07:45):
Proclamation of 1763.
On paper, it recognized thatIndigenous nations held title to
their lands and could only sellto the crown, a principle still
referenced by First Nationstoday.
But paper promises mean littlewithout the will to honor them.
Over the next century,britain's view of Indigenous
(08:06):
peoples shifted from partners toproblems.
The War of 1812 was the lasttime the Crown truly relied on
Indigenous nations as allies.
Leaders like Tecumseh foughtalongside the British, trusting
promises that their lands andnations would be protected.
When the war ended, thosepromises evaporated.
(08:28):
The Treaty of Ghent didn't evenmention Indigenous rights.
By the mid-1800s, the push tocivilize was in full swing.
Settlers moved west and theBagot Commission of 1842-44
recommended educating Indigenouschildren in industrial boarding
(08:49):
schools, away from theinfluence of their families and
communities.
This was decades beforeresidential schools became
official policy, but it laid thegroundwork and blueprint.
In 1857, the GradualCivilization Act offered
citizenship and a small parcelof land to Indigenous men who
(09:09):
gave up their Indian status andtreaty rights.
Out of thousands, only one managreed.
When Confederation came in 1867,canada inherited authority over
Indians and lands reserved forIndians.
By 1876, the Indian Actcodified that control, defining
(09:31):
who is legally an Indian,imposing reserves and regulating
governance, movement andculture.
From there the residentialschool system took shape.
In 1879, prime Minister John AMacdonald backed Nicholas Flood
Davin's recommendation Afterstudying US industrial schools.
(09:52):
The Indigenous children shouldbe removed from their parents
for most of the year to beassimilated.
Macdonald put it bluntly whenthe school is on the reserve,
the child lives with its parents, who are savages.
He is simply a savage who canread and write.
Indian children should bewithdrawn as much as possible
(10:15):
from their parental influence.
By 1894, amendments to theIndian Act made attendance at
these schools compulsory forIndigenous children from age 7
to 16, with only limitedexemptions.
In 1920, the law went evenfurther, making it illegal for
status Indigenous children toattend any school other than a
(10:37):
government or church-runresidential institution.
Parents who resisted riskedhaving their children taken by
Indian agents or police.
From the 1800s until the lastschool closed in 1996, more than
150,000 Indigenous childrenwent through this system.
They were stripped of theirnames, punished for speaking
(11:01):
their languages and forbiddenfrom practicing their own
culture.
In my territory, stolo, elderSiamia Tiliot remembers sneaking
to the far side of theplayground to quietly speak her
language.
She is now the last fluentHalclamalum speaker.
Official records confirm thatat least 3,200 children died in
(11:23):
these schools, mostly fromdisease, malnutrition and
neglect, but the Truth andReconciliation Commission
believes the real number is farhigher, with death rates in some
schools exceeding those ofCanadian soldiers in wartime.
Warnings about these conditionsgo back generations.
(11:43):
In 1914, duncan Campbell Scott,the Deputy Superintendent of
Indian Affairs, admitted that50% of the children who passed
through these schools did notlive to benefit from the
education which they hadreceived therein.
He wasn't condemning the system, he was running it and
(12:06):
remaining committed to the goalof erasing Indigenous identity
from Canada's future.
What began as fragile tradealliances in the 1500s had, by
the late 19th century and early20th century, hardened into a
system designed to reshapeIndigenous peoples into a
European mold, eroding languages, breaking cultural continuity
(12:29):
and severing children from theirfamilies and communities.
It didn't happen overnight.
It was built law by law, policyby policy, over the course of
three centuries.
And to move forward we need anuanced understanding of how we
got here.
Indian Residential School TrackRecord.
(12:50):
Throughout History we knowIndian residential schools in
Canada lasted for nearly acentury and across that time,
report after report told thegovernment exactly what was
wrong, and every time theynodded and carried on.
When Dr Peter Bryce, canada'schief medical officer, reported
(13:31):
staggering mortality rates 15 to24% of children dying in the
schools, climbing to over 40% insome communities the causes
were no mystery Tuberculosis,overcrowding and appalling
sanitation Ottawa buried thatreport.
By 1922, bryce had enough.
He published the story of anational crime, openly accusing
(13:53):
the Department of Indian Affairsof criminal negligence for
allowing conditions he callednothing short of manslaughter.
His evidence was clear, hiswords impossible to misinterpret
.
And still nothing changed.
Even the churches knew.
In 1935, the United Church ofCanada ran its own commission on
Indian education.
It found widespreaddeficiencies, poor educational
(14:16):
outcomes and systemic neglect ofthe children in its care.
And yet, like Bryce's report,the findings never sparked
reform.
They stayed in the archives,gathering dust.
Almost three decades later, in1967, the federal government
commissioned anthropologistHarry Hawthorne to produce a
(14:36):
survey of the contemporaryIndians of Canada.
In it, indigenous peoples weredescribed as Citizens Plus,
entitled not only to the samerights as other Canadians but
also to their treaty rights.
Hawthorne flat out criticizedresidential schools for poor
results and recommended localcontrol and a shift to day
(14:59):
schools.
It didn't shut the system down,but it began nudging Ottawa
towards integrating Indigenousstudents into provincial schools
.
By the late 1960s, and asfederal archives confirmed, most
churches wanted out.
Running these schools wascostly, controversial and
increasingly indefensible.
In 1969, the federal governmenttook over from the churches.
(15:23):
Then in 1972, the NationalIndian Brotherhood released
Indian Control of IndianEducation.
The title said it all andOttawa agreed in 1973.
New enrollments in residentialschools began to drop sharply,
but change wasn't coming fastenough for survivors still in
(15:46):
the system.
By the mid-1980s and into theearly 1990s, survivors were
organizing, supporting oneanother and, as court records
showed, launching class actionlawsuits.
In October 1990, phil Fontaine,grand Chief of the Assembly of
(16:06):
Manitoba Chiefs, publiclydescribed the abuse he had
endured.
That speech was a turning point, the moment the silence started
to break and the 1990s provedthe abuse wasn't just history.
In Kamloops, an employee of theKamloops Indian Residential
School was charged with severaldozen sex crimes committed on
(16:29):
site.
He pled guilty and served aboutthree years in prison, as later
described in TRC testimony.
Survivors recalled nighttimeassaults, the abuser moving
through dorms with a flashlight.
In Saskatchewan, william Starr,administrator of the Gordon
(16:49):
Indian Residential School from1968 to 1984, admitted to
sexually abusing potentiallyhundreds of boys.
In 1993, he was sentenced to4.5 years for sexually
assaulting 10 of them.
That same period saw hundredsof lawsuits filed and over 200
(17:11):
complaints settled by Ottawa.
Then came 1996, the Royalcommission on aboriginal peoples
, a massive, multi-volume report, concluded that residential
schools were a central elementin the cultural genocide of
aboriginal peoples.
It called for healinginitiatives, community
(17:31):
controlled education and publicacknowledgement of the harm.
That same year, the lastfederally run school, gordon
Indian Residential School,closed.
And no, there was no sweepinggovernment apology.
By 2001,.
The Office of IndianResidential Schools Resolution
(17:51):
Canada was created to handle theflood of abuse claims.
That led to the 2006 IndianResidential Schools Settlement
Agreement, the largest classaction settlement in Canadian
history, and, crucially, thecreation of the Truth and
Reconciliation Commission.
The TRC began work in 2008, andfrom 2009 to 2015, it traveled
(18:16):
to every province and territory,hosted public and private
hearings, gathered over 6,000survivor statements and
collected mountains of archivalevidence.
In 2015, it released multiplevolumes and 94 calls to action.
The findings were unflinchingcalls to action.
(18:41):
The findings were unflinching.
The TRC concluded the systemwas a cultural genocide, a
deliberate policy to eraseIndigenous languages,
spirituality and ways of life,forcing assimilation into
Euro-Canadian society.
Over 150,000 First Nations Inuit.
Over 150,000 First NationsInuit and Métis children
(19:04):
attended these schools betweenthe 1800s and 1996.
Survivors described widespreadphysical, sexual and emotional
abuse, harsh discipline, poorsanitation, malnutrition and
unsafe living conditions.
Beatings for speaking one'slanguage this is a quote.
If we were caught speaking ourlanguage, they would make us
(19:26):
kneel on the floor for hours,sometimes with a pencil under
our knees.
The pain was unbearable.
They wanted to make sure weforgot who we were.
Survivor Testimony TRC Volume.
Final Report, volume 5.
Sexual abuse by staff wasreported.
Here is a quote.
(19:47):
I was eight when the prieststarted coming into my bed at
night.
I didn't understand what washappening.
If I cried he would tell me Iwas going to hell and no one
would believe me.
I never told my parents until Iwas in my 50s.
That's survivor testimony inthe final report.
(20:07):
Malnutrition experiments.
Here's a quote from this.
We were always hungry.
They told us we were part of anexperiment.
We didn't know what that meant,just that food was bad and
there wasn't enough.
My teeth bled for years.
Testimony from former AlberniIndian Residential School
(20:28):
student documented in IanMosby's research Classmates
disappearing.
Here's a quote One morning thelittle boy who slept in the bed
next to mine was gone.
They told us he was sent home,but his parents never saw him
again.
I found out many years later hehad died and was buried behind
(20:51):
the school.
Survivor testimony from the TRCmissing children and unmarked
burials volume Cultural eraser.
From the TRC Missing Childrenand Unmarked Burials volume
Cultural Eraser.
They cut my hair the day Iarrived.
They told me my name was nogood and gave me a number.
I wasn't allowed to see mybrother, even though he was in
(21:12):
the same building.
We stopped being family themoment we got there.
That's survivor testimony fromthe TRC final report.
At least 3,200 children areknown to have died but, as the
TRC's Missing Children andUnmarked Burials volume makes
clear, there was no organizedeffort to record deaths across
(21:33):
the system.
The National Student DeathRegister is far from complete.
Many documents remainunreviewed, others were
inconsistently reported and somewere destroyed entirely.
Other estimates place the realnumber between 4,100 and 6,500.
The TRC also documented thesuppression of languages, the
(21:57):
dismantling of culturaltransmission and the
intergenerational trauma thatfollowed Cycles of mental health
struggles, substance use andfamily breakdown.
And those 94 calls to action?
They range from child welfareto education, language
revitalization, justice reformand commemoration.
(22:18):
The point and the TRC itselfstressed this is that this
wasn't the work of a few badapples.
It was a planned governmentpolicy carried out in
partnership with churches formore than a century.
The last school closed lessthan 30 years ago.
(22:40):
Survivor testimony was centralto the TRC's work and their
voices are now part of Canada'shistorical record.
But even the commission warnedwhen testimony is prioritized
over documentary records, thetruth becomes vulnerable to
denial.
That's why both matter thestories and the hard evidence,
(23:01):
because without both, the truthcan be picked apart.
In December 2015, the TRCcompleted its work and released
its final report, concludingthat the residential school
system amounted to a culturalgenocide.
Just two months earlier, justinTrudeau had been elected prime
minister.
Sworn in, on November 4th,still in his political honeymoon
(23:25):
, he walked into the TRC's finalreport release on December 15th
.
In his speech that day, trudeauacknowledged the gravity of the
TRC's conclusions that what hadbeen done to Indigenous children
and communities was not justwrong but part of a deliberate
policy to erase languages,cultures and identities.
And he didn't just offersymbolic gestures.
(23:48):
He committed to fullyimplementing all 94 calls to
action directed at the federalgovernment, promising to do it
in partnership with Indigenouscommunities.
He pledged a national inquiryinto missing and murdered
Indigenous women and girls oneof the calls to action and
elevated reconciliation to whathe called a sacred obligation
(24:09):
for his government.
In the years that followed, hisgovernment took some steps
formally adopting the UnitedNations Declaration on the
Rights of Indigenous Peoplesinto law, creating the National
Council for Reconciliation andpassing legislation to protect
Indigenous languages.
But progress was uneven.
Many calls to action remainunfinished.
(24:30):
Even among allies, praise wascautious.
Former TRC chair MurraySinclair welcomed the
commitments but pressed forfaster, tangible results.
Still in those early days, themomentum felt.
Real Reports showed realopportunities to improve living
conditions for First Nations andTrudeau seemed eager, even
(24:53):
determined, to be the one tolead the change.
The Mass Graves Story.
With all of that history, nowlet's get to the mass grave
story and the rise in so-calledIndian residential school
denialism.
In May 2021, tecumelups,tecequepemc First Nation made an
announcement that would ignitenational and international
(25:15):
attention.
They revealed the results of aground-penetrating radar survey
at the site of the formerKamloops Indian Residential
School in British Columbia.
The work was led byanthropologist and GPR
specialist, sarah Boulot fromthe University of the Fraser
Valley.
Kamloops was not a smallinstitution.
(25:37):
It was one of the largestresidential schools in Canada,
operated by the Catholic Churchfrom 1890 until 1978.
Preliminary ground penetratingradar scans identified what were
interpreted as the remains ofan estimated 215 children in
unmarked graves.
Many of these children werebelieved to be very young, with
(26:00):
some claiming that they would bearound the age of three at the
time of death.
Young, with some claiming thatthey would be around the age of
three at the time of death.
The locations aligned withsurvivor testimony.
Stories told for decades aboutchildren who had died at the
school and were buried withoutmarkers, without records and
without families being told.
As Sarah Boulot explained inher July 2021 public statement,
(26:22):
these were not mass graves inthe sense of a single large pit,
but rather individual or smallgroup burial sites in an orchard
area used by the school, andshe stressed that the results
were preliminary.
Ground penetrating radar doesnot produce an image of bones or
bodies.
(26:42):
It detects soil disturbances,anomalies consistent with grave
shafts, but confirmation wouldrequire excavation, which had
not been done.
This announcement wassignificant.
It became the first majorground-penetrating radar finding
publicized as part of a growingnational effort to locate
(27:03):
missing children fromresidential schools, following
the National Truth andReconciliation Commission's 2015
report.
The news prompted calls foraccountability, federal funding
for more searches and furtherinvestigations across Canada.
Survivors said the resultsconfirmed what they had been
telling governments and churchesfor generations that children
(27:25):
had died and their deaths werehidden.
It's important to note thatground penetrating radar is not
experimental guesswork.
It's a well-establishedarchaeological tool used
globally to locate unmarkedgraves.
It's been applied inbattlefield archaeology to
(27:45):
locate unmarked graves.
It's been applied inbattlefield archaeology,
holocaust research at sites likeTreblinka and in indigenous
grave repatriation projects inCanada, australia and New
Zealand.
In Canada, ground-penetratingradar had already been used in
RCMP cold cases and historiccemetery research before
Kamloops.
(28:08):
What made the Kamloops findingscompelling to experts was the
pattern.
As Boulot explained, theanomalies had a consistent size
and shape, small grave shaftsmatching the dimension of
children's burials.
They showed regular spacingdepth consistent with the
historical burial period,regular spacing depth consistent
with the historical burialperiod, and they were in the
precise orchard locationsurvivors had identified decades
(28:29):
earlier as the burial site theway that they are shaped, the
way that they are positioned,their size and their depth is
consistent with burials, shesaid, as reported by the CBC
News.
Still, limitations remain.
No excavation has been carriedout, partly due to cultural
(28:49):
protocols, legal considerationsand community decision-making.
Some argue that withoutphysical remains, the findings
are unproven, but the Tekemloops, tsekewetmik and many
archaeologists counter that inIndigenous-led research, oral
history and non-invasivetechnology are valid evidence,
(29:11):
especially when government andchurch records are incomplete or
have been destroyed.
After Kamloops, the federalgovernment pledged funding for
similar searches at other formerresidential school sites.
Dozens of communities havesince undertaken
ground-penetrating radar surveys, many reporting additional
anomalies consistent withhundreds more potential unmarked
(29:32):
graves.
The Catholic Church whichoperated Kamloops faced renewed
calls for a formal apology andfull access to records.
The announcement alsoaccelerated national
conversations, from loweringflags on federal buildings to
establishing the National Dayfor Truth and Reconciliation.
(29:52):
But the story also drew critics,several of whom I've
interviewed on this show.
Journalist Jonathan Kaye,writing in Quillette in 2022,
argued that the media's framing,using phrases like discovery of
human remains and mass graves,overstated the facts.
Kay noted that groundpenetrating radar detects ground
(30:15):
disturbances, not bodies, andthat no remains had been exhumed
.
In his view, the coveragebecame a national social panic
where reporters repeated oneanother's framing without
caution or correction.
He's called for carefulverification before making
definitive claims, stressingthat tragedies in residential
(30:36):
school history are real.
But premature conclusionsundermine trust.
Sure conclusions underminetrust.
Nigel Begar, another past guest, argued in a December 2024
essay titled Grievances PoliticsFuels New Era of Fake History
that the Kamloops story fit intoa broader Western pattern of
(30:57):
media-driven moral panic andretrospective colonial guilt.
Candace Malcolm, also a formerguest, was among the earliest
and loudest voices questioningthe Kamloops narrative.
She's described the coverage asone of the most destructive
fake news narratives in Canadianhistory.
Milcom points to the absence ofexhumed remains, the
(31:20):
speculative nature of thereports and cases where
anomalies were later found to bein established cemeteries.
She often cites laterexcavations at Pine Creek and
Kamso Hospital, where no humanremains were found, as
vindication for her skepticism.
In her view, the moral andpolitical fallout from the
(31:43):
initial reporting, includingvandalism at churches, the
cancellation of Canada Dayevents and the creation of a
national holiday, weredisproportionate to the
unconfirmed evidence.
Malcolm also contributed to andpromoted grave error how the
media misled us and the TruthAbout Residential Schools a 2023
(32:05):
anthology edited by CP Championand Tom Flanagan.
The book compiles essays fromjournalists, academics and
commentators who argue thatCanadian media and political
leaders overstated aspects ofthe unmarked graves narrative.
The contributors question theinterpretation of ground
(32:25):
penetrating radar results,criticize what they see as
political exploitation of thestory and challenge elements of
residential school history asframed by the National Truth and
Reconciliation Commission.
Supporters say it's a necessarycorrective.
Critics say it's downplayingsurvivor experiences and
(32:45):
undermining reconciliation.
So the Kamloops story sits atthe intersection of history,
technology, survivor testimonyand public trust.
For many Indigenous communitiesit was a validation of
long-ignored truths.
For others it was a case studyin the dangers of media
amplification without physicalverification.
(33:08):
And for the country it becameone of the most consequential
and contested moments in theongoing conversation about
Canada's residential schoollegacy the fallout.
Here's the divide.
As I understand it, if you'releft-leaning, you tend to trust
the CBC, you trust the NationalTruth and Reconciliation
(33:30):
Commission, you trust and knowthat Stephen Harper and the Pope
apologized and you trust thearchaeologists, which leads you
to believe the claim is true and, as mentioned earlier, per the
National Truth andReconciliation Commission's
final report, at least 3,200children are known to have died
in residential schools.
(33:50):
But here's the thing as foundin the TRC's Missing Children
and Unmarked Burials volume.
There was no organized effortto record deaths across the
entire system.
The National Student DeathRegister is far from complete,
with many documents stillunreviewed.
Death counts remain unknownbecause of incomplete records,
(34:11):
inconsistent reporting and, insome cases, outright destruction
of files.
Other estimates place the realnumber between 4,100 and 6,500.
So when the 215 anomalies inKamloops were reported in 2021,
for many that was seen asevidence confirming what the TRC
(34:32):
already said that records wereincomplete and that the actual
number could be much higher.
If you're right-leaning, you seeit differently.
You question why the CBC, newYork Times and Washington Post
made such a bold claim withoutdefinitive proof, then why they
(34:52):
quietly changed or updated theirwording.
You note that thearchaeologists are pointing to
ground-penetrating radarreadings, not to confirmed
remains of children, not toconfirmed remains of children.
You ask why culture andemotions seem to outweigh hard
evidence, especially when thisis an extraordinary claim that,
in your view, requiresextraordinary proof.
(35:12):
You question the dramaticpolitical and financial response
, including a $246 millioncommunity fund.
You point out that the TRCrelies heavily on survivor
testimony rather than only coldstatistical data, and you ask
why, four years later, therehave been no excavations.
(35:34):
If you're right-leaning, you'realso likely conservative.
And what does it mean to be aconservative?
At its core, it means you wantto conserve, to preserve history
, culture and the stories wetell ourselves.
So when the CBC broke the 215unmarked graves story, and
churches were burned orvandalized in the aftermath, the
(35:56):
conservative reaction waspredictable through that lens.
That's why it's important to beaware of the instinct towards
conservation when reviewingcomplex, important topics,
because it shapes how youinterpret the facts.
The reality is, ground surveyshave revealed numerous potential
burial sites, but human remainshave only been confirmed in a
(36:19):
very few cases, and often notthrough targeted excavations.
Now here's where theconversation gets heated.
People who question the 2021story are often accused of being
Indian residential schooldeniers.
There are two problems withthat, to start with.
First, it's inaccurate.
These people aren't denyingthat residential schools existed
(36:42):
or that they caused harm.
These people aren't denyingthat residential schools existed
or that they caused harm.
They're questioning a specificclaim.
Second, the term is politicallyloaded, deliberately echoing
Holocaust denier.
And here's the strange part Eventhe CBC admits the definition
doesn't actually mean someonedenies the existence of the
school system.
(37:02):
Mean someone denies theexistence of the school system.
In a March 17th 2025 article,cbc journalist Samantha
Schweintek wrote.
Residential school denialismdoes not deny the existence of
the school system, but ratherdownplays, excuses or
misinterprets facts about theharms caused by it, experts say.
The experts she cites are DrDaniel Heath Justice and Dr Sean
(37:26):
Carlton, professors andco-authors of Truth Before
Reconciliation Eight Ways toIdentify and Confront
Residential School Denialism,and they use the same definition
.
Here's the problem when youredefine a loaded term so it no
longer matches its plain meaning, you turn the debate into a
(37:46):
political weapon.
It's like calling someone amurderer then saying well, I
define murderer as anyone who'sever killed a bug.
You'd be right to see that asbad faith and manipulative.
Calling someone a denier, thenadmitting they're not actually
denying the thing in question,does exactly that.
It frustrates, it confuses andit poisons the conversation.
(38:09):
That framing is part of whythis has gotten so political.
You have people like formerCrown Indigenous Relations
Minister Gary Anansangare, ndpMP Leah Ghazan and some survivor
groups advocating for a law tomake denialism a criminal
offense.
Under their proposed bill,anyone other than in private who
(38:33):
condones, denies or downplaysor justifies the Indian
residential school system ormisrepresents facts related to
it could face up to two years inprison, and the denier label
has been used in real world waysthat damage reputations.
In Quesnel, for example, themayor's wife was accused of
(38:53):
distributing a book promotingresidential school denialism the
same grave error book we'vediscussed before and the mayor
was condemned by his own counciland the Union of BC Indian
Chiefs.
The reality is this story iscomplicated.
The nations themselves areoften choosing not to release
(39:13):
certain evidence, and that isabsolutely their right.
But if that's the case, thenit's not unreasonable for people
to remain skeptical.
The case, then it's notunreasonable for people to
remain skeptical.
Respecting a nation's right toprivacy comes with the caveat
that conclusions will draw, thatpeople will choose their own
conclusions.
When Minister Gary Anand Sangrecame on my show, as well as past
(39:37):
guests like Candace Malcolm andformer Indigenous Services
Canada Minister Patti Hajdu, Itold them that criminalizing
denialism is a very bad idea.
First, because people have aright to freedom of expression.
Second, because doing so willonly deepen the divide between
First Nations and the rest ofCanada.
Third, that the term denierdoesn't reflect its plain
(40:00):
meaning.
And lastly, because we don'thave all the evidence needed to
justify such a law.
Here's my clip with MinisterGary Anansangare and Patti Hajdu
on criminalizing denialism.
The other conversation is aroundthe caps on Indian residential
school searches and the fundingfor that.
(40:21):
Now I just want to betransparent.
I've had multiple conversationswith people various on the
political spectrum.
I've spoken to Chief WillieSellers from Williams Lake First
Nation.
We talked about his communityand the actual searches that may
go on in his community.
Michael Moses, who's runningfor the BCNDP, but I've also
spoken to individuals likeCandace Malcolm from True North
(40:43):
Media about her perspective andthe book that her organization,
true North, released, sayingthat perhaps there aren't these
unmarked graves, that the CBCstory that was initially
reported has some problems withit.
One discovered there's theseabnormalities that may be bodies
and I'm wondering how youprocess this story.
(41:09):
And then how do you decideyou've removed the caps on that
search?
How did you come to thatdecision?
Gary Anandasanagree (41:16):
You know I was at Williams Lake.
I was at, you know we did.
I was at Williams Lake lastyear around this time I met with
Charlene Bellew, who is veryinvolved with the work of St
Joseph's Residential Schools.
I walked the ground and youknow this was was about three,
(41:43):
four in the afternoon by thetime I finished and I had so
many other things to do that day.
Um, I just went to the hoteland I had to shut down and I
have not felt like that in anyother day in this role and I had
to shut down because the, theemotion was so overwhelming and
the impact that just evenwalking and understanding and
(42:06):
understanding the stories justum, just crushed me right.
Um.
And for anyone to suggest that,um, you know we, we can't accept
residential school, but that'stook place, that young people
didn't go home, families didn'thave their kids back, I think
it's absolute nonsense and it isthe type of hatred, in my
(42:31):
opinion, that warrants criminalreview.
And almost when we talk aboutHolocaust denial or denialism of
any major event, I thinkgenocide.
I think this is at that pointwhere it should be part of
Canadian criminal law to be ableto talk about those who deny
(42:55):
that this happened.
The work I think that's beingundertaken by the community is a
verification process to see youknow if, if there are um bodies
that can be found, uh, or thatcan be exhumed, that can be, uh,
you know, tested um, and everysingle one of those steps takes
buy-in from the community, takescommitment, it takes, frankly,
(43:20):
the, the, the understanding ofyou know what they're going to
be able to live with when theydo that search, and everyone
will have different decisionpoints and everyone will not
have the same outcome, butultimately everyone deserves
change to undertake this processif and when they're ready.
(43:43):
Well, I can see the foundationof why that bill has been
proposed.
I mean, ultimately, at the endof the day, it's extremely
hurtful to individuals,especially individuals with an
experience in residential school, which is many, if not most,
individuals in this countryIndigenous, sorry, first Nations
, indigenous people in thiscountry, and so I understand the
(44:04):
motive behind it.
The government's still studyingthat bill to see whether or not
and of course, it's not even indebate yet.
But eventually the governmentwill decide about whether it
supports the bill or not andwhether or not there's other
legislation that you know isduplicative.
For example, we do have hatespeech laws in this country.
Are they enough?
So, you know, ultimately, atthe end of the day, I would say,
(44:27):
stay tuned for a decision fromthe government, but what I would
say that the government agreeswith is that the experience of
denialism is very painful forpeople that are, you know,
mourning the loss of theirfamily, mourning the impact of
their parents and the experienceof their parents on their own
(44:48):
lives.
There's just so much loss andgrief in this space that you
know.
What I hope is that Canadiansincreasingly want to understand
and be compassionate to thehealing journey that First
Nations people are on.
Aaron Pete (45:05):
And I'm consistent about this.
When a Vancouver theologyschool tried to cancel a lecture
by Nigel Begar, a past guest,because he was labeled a denier,
I reached out to the organizers.
I told them I'd be happy toattend to question Begar
directly and that, while Idisagree with some of his views,
I believe he has the right tospeak and that his views have a
(45:27):
right to be challenged.
Because I'm about as close to afree speech absolutist as you
can get.
I did attend that event.
I engaged with him respectfullyand, despite where we disagree,
I still respect him as athinker who's willing to show up
and defend his position in anopen conversation.
That said, I also see the otherside.
(45:51):
Some people do try and downplaythe harm of residential schools
unnecessarily.
When I spoke with CandaceMalcolm, for example, she
acknowledged that bad thingshappened and that the policy
failed, but did argue that theintentions were good and that
there are good stories that comefrom them.
Candice Malcolm (46:08):
Here's that conversation with Candace
Malcolm.
So like a bunch of—so thegovernment recruited a bunch of
murderers to go off and likekill kids, like I just am trying
to understand the accusationbecause, again, like because
we're writing about this, it's asuper controversial topic.
I've heard from a lot ofCanadians.
I really respect what you'resaying and I'm happy to continue
this conversation as long asyou want because I think I can
learn from you in this instancebecause you're a lot more
connected to it than I.
But I've heard from people whosay you know, there was an
(46:31):
Indian residential school in mycommunity and they got more
money than the public schools orthe Catholic schools and they
had more resources and they hadbetter teachers and they had
nicer buildings.
They had better teachers andthey had nicer buildings.
And I've talked to people whowere graduates of these
residential schools and they saythat it changed their life and
it made them on a better pathtowards succeeding in a modern
(46:52):
economy.
So like there's two sides to it,right, it's like I'm sure a lot
of people went to school andhad a miserable experience and
they were homesick and they weresad.
A lot of people really wantedtheir children to attend these
schools because they saw it asan opportunity for betterment.
Like I said, the schoolsweren't compulsory, they weren't
mandatory.
They weren't going and scoopingpeople up from their house,
(47:13):
despite there's a sort of athought that that was happening,
that the Canadian police weregoing door to door and scooping
kids up and taking them to theseschools.
That's a myth, as far as I canunderstand.
People wanted the schools andsure, like in any environment,
there's going to be an abuse ofpower.
There's going to be.
There was abuse and there washorrible, unspeakable abuse and
it's tragic and anyone who wasinvolved in that should be held
(47:36):
accountable.
There's a reason we got rid ofthis program.
It obviously failed.
It didn't work, although somepeople did benefit from it.
Aaron Pete (47:43):
And Nigel Bagar argued that First Nation
communities often asked forIndian residential schools and
the mass grave story connotesmurder and that it created a
moral panic.
Nigel Biggar (47:59):
Here's that clip.
Well, as you say, aaron, therewas this claim back in three
years ago in Kamloops, based onground penetrating radar that
revealed there'd been earthmovements under the ground and
it was assumed these were themass graves of Indian kids,
(48:21):
undiscovered, unknown.
And, of course, to use the wordmass graves, which is the
phrase that was used in thepress by the New York Times and
Al Jazeera, does connote massmurder.
And then, subsequently, therewere multiple similar claims.
And then you had the peoplestarting to burn down Catholic
(48:47):
churches I think 83 had beenburned down to date, because
some of these schools were runby Catholic religious orders and
as of now, there is no evidenceof mass graves, there's no
evidence that whoever is inthose graves was murdered and
(49:08):
actually, in some cases they'renot even unknown.
In other words, they arerecorded, it's just that the
grave markers have worn away anddon't exist.
A lot of the graves wereactually recorded in the Truth
and Reconciliation Commissionreport.
So right now, from myperspective, it seems as if the
(49:31):
panic, the moral panic aboutmass killings of First Nations
kids is not true, and thatraises the question as to why
was it propagated and why didthe I mean the journalists have
a duty to interrogate claims andto assess evidence, and it
(49:57):
seems they didn't.
And now that the evidencesuggests that, I mean it's
possible, it's possible.
Someone will yet dig up thegrave, the unknown graves of
kids who were abused or killed.
Possible, but it hasn'thappened.
That's three years.
If that's the case, why aren'tthose who put about this myth
(50:21):
only up to it?
Why don't we read about it innewspapers?
I guess people are beingcautious to see, but correct me
if I'm wrong.
Right now it looks as if theclaims were not true.
Is that true?
Aaron Pete (50:34):
The important takeaway is that the mass grave
story does not claim that thechildren were murdered, which is
the angle Candice and Nigelhave misunderstood or
misinterpreted.
The TRC is very clear that itwas often due to tuberculosis,
poor living conditions and lackof nutrition.
(50:54):
But both Candice and Nigel wereopen to having a conversation.
And here's the thing Dr SeanCarlton and I debated on X.
He accused me of carrying waterfor Indian residential school
deniers by speaking with them onmy show, despite the fact that
I've interviewed many on theright and left on this issue.
(51:16):
I've spoken with governmentofficials, journalists, first
Nation leaders and media punditswith varying perspectives First
Nation leaders and mediapundits with varying
perspectives.
I believe they have every rightto question things, but they
should also understand the livedimpact.
From where I sit, this debateis dividing First Nations and
(51:37):
everyday Canadians more than itneeds to.
On the left, you have peoplepushing to criminalize
skepticism.
On the right, you have peoplebeing unnecessarily
unsympathetic to Indigenoushistory.
So here's my position Ifnations want to continue making
these public claims, they shouldbe willing to back them up with
(51:57):
evidence.
If you're skeptical on theright, I challenge you to read
the survivors' stories and putyourself in their shoes of a
First Nations family, becausefor us this is not a debate, an
abstract political debate.
I'm the chief of my First Nation.
My grandmother attended StMary's Indian Residential School
(52:18):
where she was abused soseverely that she struggled with
alcohol for the rest of herlife so severely that she
struggled with alcohol for therest of her life.
My aunt and several people Iwork with also went to St Mary's
the same school Siamia Tillyattended, who is now the last
fluent Halclamalum speaker.
My mother was born with fetalalcohol syndrome disorder
(52:39):
because of my grandmother'sdrinking the cycle trauma
leading to substance use becauseof my grandmother's drinking
the cycle trauma leading tosubstance use leading to more
trauma still affects manyfamilies in my community and
throughout Canada.
So, yes, there may be validquestions about the 215
anomalies in Kamloops, but thatdoesn't erase the documented
abuse, the poor livingconditions and the thousands of
(53:01):
confirmed child deaths that theTRC called the low estimate.
And we need to be aware thatthis fight over words and claims
is starting to hurt FirstNations politically.
In BC, conservative leader JohnRustad had party members
accused of being deniers.
Mla Dallas Brody, leader ofOneBC, has been campaigning on
(53:23):
the idea that First Nations gettoo much support.
Federally, reconciliationdidn't crack the top five issues
in the last election.
Prime Minister Mark Carney isnowhere near as focused on
Indigenous issues as JustinTrudeau was.
And now Indigenous Services.
Canada is facing a $5 billionbudget reduction and 15% cuts
(53:45):
over the next three years, which, in my view, means losing an
investment our communities can'tafford to lose.
That's the landscape we're in,and if we don't find a way to
bridge this divide, it's onlygoing to get worse.
Conclusion In the end, the 2021mass, grave story has become
(54:07):
less about evidence and moreabout the political and cultural
trenches it has carved.
On the one side are those whosee it as confirmation of what
survivors have been saying foryears, a painful truth that must
be faced head on.
On the other are those whoquestion the proof, the
reporting and the politicalcapital it has generated.
(54:29):
What gets lost in thatcrossfire is the human reality.
For First Nations families likemine, the harms of residential
schools are not up for debate.
They're lived experience.
Schools are not up for debate.
They're lived experience.
They show up in the scars ourparents and grandparents carried
in, the trauma that stillshapes our communities, in the
(54:51):
economic and educationalbarriers we continue to face,
whether the number is 3,200,4,100, or more, each figure
represents a child who nevermade it home.
That's why this conversationneeds less grandstanding and
more honesty.
If public claims are made, theevidence must be provided openly
(55:13):
.
If hard questions are asked,they must be paired with a
willingness to confront the fullscope of the truth.
Criminalizing debate will deependivides.
Denying history will compoundthe harm.
Reconciliation cannot rest onselective truth.
If we only tell the parts ofthe story that fit our politics,
(55:36):
whether to defend a narrativeor to attack it, we fail the
generations who lived thishistory.
It takes courage to hold griefand skepticism in the same hand,
to honor survivors' pain whileinsisting on transparency, to
demand accuracy withoutabandoning empathy, and to
(55:58):
defend free expression withouterasing the suffering that
brought us here.
We cannot criminalize questions.
It makes the truth look weakand fuels distrust, and we
cannot deny history.
It reopens wounds that neverhealed.
Those who demand silence in thename of sensitivity risk
(56:20):
alienating Canadians who mightotherwise stand with us.
Those who downplay the abuse,death and cultural destruction
risk proving survivors rightwhen they say their pain is
minimized.
The only way forward is to tellthe whole truth, even when it's
messy, incomplete anduncomfortable.
(56:41):
The truth is.
The TRC makes it clear thereare likely unmarked graves, and
the areas where groundpenetrating radar found
anomalies are an obvious placeto start.
But if a nation chooses not toexcavate and provide evidence,
then voices like Dallas Brody,candace, malcolm Francis,
widowson and others have everyright to raise questions,
(57:04):
express doubt and challenge thestory.
That's what accountability isholding institutions,
governments and media to astandard of accuracy and holding
ourselves to a standard ofcompassion.
If we fail to do that, the gapbetween First Nations and the
rest of Canada will onlycontinue to widen until
(57:25):
reconciliation is nothing morethan a hollow political slogan.
But if we do it, if we demandtruth while showing respect,
then maybe, maybe, just maybe,we can replace mistrust with
understanding and buildsomething strong enough for us
to all carry forward.
Nuance isn't weakness, it'sstrength.
(57:48):
It's how we protect both memoryand integrity.
It's how we move from symbolicreconciliation to meaningful
change.
I'm a First Nations chief.
I've seen intergenerationalpain.
I've also seen what happenswhen media, politicians or
activists oversimplify ourstories for clicks, for grants
(58:09):
or for ideological gain.
That does not help us.
It turns our history into aweapon, one that's just as
likely to backfire.
So this is the challenge forall of us.
Tell the truth, the whole truth, not just the parts that feel
good or are convenient.
Don't shut down dissent.
(58:29):
Don't weaponize grief and don'tassume that pain justifies bad
reporting, because the only wayto build real reconciliation is
to build it on truth documented,confirmed, accountable and
human.
That's how we earn trust,that's how we honor survivors
and that's how we build a futureworth fighting for.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com